1. Introduction

Purpose

These instructions provide a technical framework for developing an HTML/JavaScript-based calculator designed to generate estimates of inhaled exposure to key electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) aerosol components. The target components include Nicotine, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), Propylene Glycol and Vegetable Glycerin (PG/VG) combined, and Formaldehyde. The calculator aims to estimate potential exposure for both the primary e-cigarette user and a hypothetical bystander sharing a closed indoor environment. It is crucial to understand that this tool is intended solely for illustrative and educational purposes. It demonstrates potential exposure scenarios derived from simplified mathematical models and parameters informed by available scientific research. The outputs are estimations and should not be interpreted as precise measurements of actual exposure or health risk.

Scope

The calculator will feature user-adjustable inputs via sliders for Room Volume (V, m³), Vaping Duration (T, minutes), and Vaping Intensity (Low, Medium, High). Based on these inputs and predefined parameters, it will perform calculations to estimate:

  1. The total mass (µg) of each target component inhaled by the primary user (before accounting for respiratory retention).
  2. The estimated average concentration (µg/m³) of each component in the room air, contributing to bystander exposure.
  3. The total mass (µg) of each component potentially inhaled by a bystander present in the room for the specified duration.
  4. An estimated “cigarette equivalent” based solely on the calculated absorbed dose of nicotine for both the user and the bystander.

The underlying models represent significant simplifications of complex, dynamic real-world processes involving aerosol generation, transport, transformation, and human physiology.

Foundation

The parameters, assumptions, and modeling approaches detailed herein are based on a review of scientific literature concerning e-cigarette emissions, aerosol characteristics, secondhand aerosol (SHA) exposure dynamics, nicotine pharmacokinetics, and relevant physiological parameters-40]. Specific studies informing parameter choices and model structures are referenced throughout this document.

Target Audience

These instructions are intended for individuals with technical proficiency in web development, specifically HTML and JavaScript, and a basic understanding of mathematical formulas. Potential users include developers, public health informatics specialists, or researchers tasked with implementing such a tool based on the provided scientific and computational framework.

Disclaimer Preview

The final calculator interface must prominently display clear disclaimers. These must emphasize the tool’s limitations, the significant uncertainties inherent in the estimations, the simplified nature of the models, and the established health risks associated with vaping and exposure to its emissions, regardless of the calculated values.1

2. Calculator Input Parameters and Definitions

Overview

The calculator’s functionality relies on three primary user inputs, implemented as sliders to allow for intuitive exploration of different scenarios. These inputs represent key factors influencing exposure levels in an indoor environment.

2.1. Room Volume (V)

  • Definition: Represents the internal volume of the enclosed space (e.g., room, office, vehicle cabin) where vaping occurs. This parameter is crucial for determining the dilution of exhaled aerosol.
  • Units: Cubic meters (m³).
  • Range: A suggested operational range is 10 m³ to 100 m³. This encompasses typical small indoor spaces like an office or small bedroom (around 10-30 m³) up to larger living areas or small halls (up to 100 m³). This range aligns with volumes used or implied in various indoor air quality studies involving vaping.
  • Implementation: Utilize an HTML <input type=”range”> element. Define min=”10″, max=”100″, and an appropriate step value (e.g., step=”1″ or step=”5″). Provide a corresponding label and an element (e.g., <span>) to dynamically display the selected volume in m³.

2.2. Vaping Duration (T)

  • Definition: Represents the total continuous or cumulative time period during which active vaping takes place within the specified room volume.
  • Units: Minutes.
  • Range: A suggested operational range is 10 minutes to 120 minutes (2 hours). This covers short, acute exposure scenarios often studied experimentally as well as potentially longer, more sustained vaping sessions that might occur in residential or social settings.5
  • Implementation: Utilize an HTML <input type=”range”> element. Define min=”10″, max=”120″, and an appropriate step value (e.g., step=”5″ or step=”10″). Provide a corresponding label and an element to display the selected duration in minutes.

2.3. Vaping Intensity (Low, Medium, High)

  • Definition: This qualitative input serves as a proxy for the overall rate of aerosol emission into the room. It simplifies a complex interplay of factors including the type of e-cigarette device used, its power settings (voltage/wattage), the composition of the e-liquid (nicotine concentration, PG/VG ratio), and the user’s puffing behavior (puff frequency f and puff duration, which influences the amount aerosolized per puff, Apuff_X).
  • Parameterization Rationale: E-cigarette emissions are highly variable, influenced by numerous technical and behavioral factors.7 Nicotine yield can vary by over 50-fold depending on conditions.7 Device power significantly impacts nicotine and toxicant emissions, including formaldehyde, particularly at high temperatures or under “dry puff” conditions (overheating).7 The ratio of PG to VG affects aerosol properties and mass emissions.9 User puffing patterns (frequency and duration) also play a critical role; experienced vapers often take longer puffs than tobacco smokers.7 Mapping this multi-dimensional parameter space onto a single “Intensity” slider necessitates significant simplification. The calculator will use this slider to select predefined sets of quantitative parameters (f and Apuff_X for each component) representing plausible archetypal vaping scenarios (e.g., Low = infrequent use of a low-power disposable; Medium = typical use of a pod system; High = frequent use of a high-power tank system). This simplification is a primary source of uncertainty in the calculator’s estimates and must be clearly communicated to the user.
  • Quantitative Parameter Definitions: The specific values associated with each intensity level are defined in Table 1 below. These values are derived from synthesizing data across multiple studies, aiming to represent distinct points within the wide range of reported emissions and usage patterns.
  • Table 1: Vaping Intensity Parameter Definitions
Intensity LevelDescriptionPuff Frequency (f) (puffs/min)Apuff_Nicotine (µg/puff)Apuff_PM2.5 (µg/puff)Apuff_PGVG (µg/puff)Apuff_Formaldehyde (µg/puff)Rationale/References
Low (1)Infrequent use, low power device (e.g., disposable)2305010000.5f: Standard machine protocols.19 Apuff_Nic: Lower end of ranges.7 Apuff_PM2.5: Lower emission estimate. Apuff_PGVG: Lower aerosol mass. Apuff_Formaldehyde: Low end of realistic use.13
Medium (2)Typical use, moderate power device (e.g., pod)48015030002.0f: Moderate user frequency. Apuff_Nic: Mid-range, consistent with some pod data.8 Apuff_PM2.5: Mid-range, near average emission factor.10 Apuff_PGVG: Mid-range aerosol mass. Apuff_Formaldehyde: Mid-range realistic use, near upper limit in some studies.16
High (3)Frequent use, high power device (e.g., tank)615030060005.0f: Higher user frequency. Apuff_Nic: Upper end of typical ranges, high power/nicotine liquid.7 Apuff_PM2.5: Higher emission estimate, high VG/power.9 Apuff_PGVG: Higher aerosol mass. Apuff_Formaldehyde: High end of realistic use (avoiding dry puff).13 High uncertainty.
  • Implementation: Utilize an HTML <input type=”range”> element with min=”1″, max=”3″, step=”1″. Provide labels (Low, Medium, High) corresponding to values 1, 2, and 3. JavaScript code will use the selected value (1, 2, or 3) to retrieve the appropriate set of parameters from Table 1 for calculations.

3. Exposure Modeling Framework

Overview

The calculator employs a two-part modeling framework. First, it estimates the total amount of each specified aerosol component inhaled by the primary user. Second, it estimates the resulting average concentration of these components in the room air and the subsequent inhaled dose for a hypothetical bystander sharing that space.

3.1. User Inhalation Model

This part of the model calculates the total mass of each component drawn into the user’s respiratory system before accounting for deposition and absorption.

  • Total Puffs Calculation: The total number of puffs taken during the vaping session is estimated based on the selected intensity and duration.
  • Formula: TotalPuffs = f * T
  • Inputs:
  • f: Puff frequency (puffs/min) corresponding to the selected Vaping Intensity level (from Table 1).
  • T: Vaping Duration (minutes) selected via the slider.
  • Output: TotalPuffs (dimensionless number).
  • User Inhaled Mass Calculation (Pre-Retention): The total mass of each component inhaled by the user is estimated by multiplying the amount per puff by the total number of puffs.
  • Formula: UserInhaled_X = Apuff_X * TotalPuffs
  • Inputs:
  • Apuff_X: Amount of component X (Nicotine, PM2.5, PG/VG, Formaldehyde) aerosolized per puff (µg/puff) corresponding to the selected Vaping Intensity level (from Table 1).
  • TotalPuffs: Total number of puffs calculated above.
  • Output: UserInhaled_X (µg), the estimated total mass of component X inhaled by the user before respiratory retention.

3.2. Bystander Exposure Concentration Model (C_X)

This part estimates the average concentration of each component in the room air resulting from the user’s exhaled aerosol, which serves as the basis for estimating bystander exposure.

  • Concept: Bystanders are exposed to aerosol components that are inhaled by the user but not retained in their respiratory system, and subsequently exhaled into the room air. This exhaled aerosol mixes with the room air, leading to a certain concentration (C_X) that depends on the rate at which the component is emitted by the user, the volume of the room (V), and the rate of air exchange with the outside (ventilation, or Air Changes per Hour – ACH).
  • Pulmonary Retention Fraction (Fpulm_ret_X): This parameter represents the fraction of the inhaled mass of component X that is deposited and absorbed within the user’s respiratory tract and thus not exhaled. It is a crucial factor determining how much of the inhaled substance contributes to secondhand exposure.
  • Values: Based on available literature, the following approximate retention fractions are assumed (summarized in Table 2):
  • Fpulm_ret_Nicotine: Nicotine is highly retained in the lungs. Studies suggest retention rates of 94% to over 99%.23 A value of 0.97 (97% retention) is used as a central estimate.
  • Fpulm_ret_PGVG: Propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin, the main aerosol formers, are expected to have lower retention than nicotine. Some modeling studies use values around 0.5.25 A value of 0.5 (50% retention) is assumed.
  • Fpulm_ret_PM2.5: Fine particles are partially deposited and partially exhaled. Given that PG and VG constitute the bulk of the aerosol mass, the retention of PM2.5 (which largely consists of these components) is assumed to be similar. A value of 0.5 (50% retention) is assumed.
  • Fpulm_ret_Formaldehyde: Data on formaldehyde retention from vaping is limited. As a reactive gas, retention could be high, but exhalation is also possible. Conservatively assuming moderate retention, a value of 0.7 (70% retention) is used, but this carries significant uncertainty.
  • Emission Rate Calculation: The rate at which component X is released into the room air via the user’s exhalation is calculated.
  • Formula: EmissionRate_X = (1 – Fpulm_ret_X) * Apuff_X * f
  • Inputs:
  • Fpulm_ret_X: Assumed pulmonary retention fraction for component X (from Table 2).
  • Apuff_X: Amount per puff for component X (µg/puff) from Table 1.
  • f: Puff frequency (puffs/min) from Table 1.
  • Output: EmissionRate_X (µg/min), the estimated mass emission rate of component X into the room.
  • Average Concentration Estimation (C_X): Estimating the average concentration in a real room is complex. Factors include non-uniform mixing, air currents, surface deposition, and dynamic emissions. For this calculator, a simplified approach is necessary, particularly given the request for low ACH conditions (<1 h⁻¹) and the known rapid decay of vape PM.
  • Model Choice: A standard single-box model assuming perfect mixing and first-order removal (by ventilation and deposition) can provide an average concentration. However, the rapid evaporation of vape PM particles means such models may overestimate the persistent PM concentration while underestimating peak exposures near the source. Nicotine and other gaseous components are expected to be more stable and better represented by standard models.24
  • Simplified Scaling Approach: Given these complexities and the tool’s illustrative purpose, a scaling approach based on literature values is adopted here. Reference concentrations observed in studies under broadly similar conditions (e.g., 1 hour, small room ~30-50 m³, low ventilation) are used as a basis and scaled according to the user’s inputs (Intensity, Duration, Volume).
  • Reference Concentrations (Baseline Scenario: Medium Intensity, 60 min, 40 m³, ACH=0.5): Based on literature review, plausible baseline average concentrations for this scenario are set as:
  • C_Nicotine_ref: 2.0 µg/m³
  • C_PM2.5_ref: 100 µg/m³ (Acknowledging high peak/rapid decay issue)
  • C_PGVG_ref: 100 µg/m³ (Based on limited data 5)
  • C_Formaldehyde_ref: 10 µg/m³ (Potentially slightly above background 26)
  • Scaling Calculation: The estimated average concentration C_X is calculated by adjusting the reference concentration based on the ratio of the calculated emission rate for the selected scenario (EmissionRate_X) to the reference emission rate (EmissionRate_X_ref), and inversely scaling by volume relative to the reference volume (V_ref = 40 m³), and scaling linearly with duration relative to the reference duration (T_ref = 60 min). A floor/ceiling might be needed.
  • EmissionRate_X_ref = (1 – Fpulm_ret_X) * Apuff_X_medium * f_medium
  • C_X ≈ C_X_ref * (EmissionRate_X / EmissionRate_X_ref) * (V_ref / V) * (T / T_ref)
  • (Note: This linear scaling is a simplification, especially for duration, as steady-state is not explicitly modeled. Apply reasonable bounds if needed).
  • Air Changes per Hour (ACH): A fixed low value of ACH = 0.5 h⁻¹ is assumed for all calculations, representing poor ventilation and facilitating accumulation, as requested. This is lower than typical residential ventilation rates reported in some studies 5 but consistent with low ventilation scenarios. (See Table 2).
  • Particle Dynamics Caveat: It is imperative to understand that this model provides a simplified average concentration. For PM2.5, actual concentrations are highly dynamic. Peak levels near the user can be substantially higher than the average 29, while concentrations decay rapidly due to evaporation within seconds to minutes.10 The calculated C_PM2.5 should be interpreted with this significant limitation in mind; it does not reflect the peak exposure risk or the rapid clearance dynamics. Gaseous components like nicotine are expected to persist longer and be better represented by the average concentration model.

3.3. Bystander Inhaled Dose Calculation

This step estimates the total mass of each component inhaled by a bystander exposed to the estimated average concentration C_X over the vaping duration T.

  • Formula: BystanderInhaled_X = C_X * BR_bystander * (T / 60)
  • Inputs:
  • C_X: Estimated average concentration of component X (µg/m³) from step 3.2.
  • BR_bystander: Assumed breathing rate of the bystander (m³/hr). A standard value for an adult at rest or light activity is 0.72 m³/hr (equivalent to 12 Liters/minute).32 (See Table 2).
  • T: Vaping duration (minutes) from the slider input. The division by 60 converts minutes to hours to align with the units of BR_bystander.
  • Output: BystanderInhaled_X (µg), the estimated total mass of component X inhaled by the bystander.
  • Modeling Context: This calculation uses the estimated average concentration and a standard breathing rate. More sophisticated models exist, such as Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) coupled with Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models, which can simulate airflow patterns and individual physiological uptake in greater detail 25, but these are far beyond the scope of this simplified calculator.

4. Cigarette Equivalence Calculation

Concept

This calculation provides an estimate of the number of conventional tobacco cigarettes that would deliver an equivalent absorbed dose of nicotine compared to the vaping scenario, for both the user and the bystander. It is crucial to emphasize that this comparison is based solely on nicotine and does not reflect the overall health risks, which differ significantly between vaping and smoking due to the vastly different chemical compositions of their emissions.1

4.1. Nicotine Absorbed per Cigarette Assumption

  • Value: An average systemic absorption of 1.5 mg (1500 µg) of nicotine per conventional cigarette is assumed.
  • Justification: A typical cigarette contains 10-14 mg of nicotine, but only a fraction is absorbed by the smoker. Studies indicate average systemic absorption is generally in the range of 1-2 mg per cigarette.40 The value of 1.5 mg represents a reasonable midpoint within this range. (See Table 2).

4.2. User Absorbed Nicotine Calculation

  • Formula: UserAbsorbed_Nicotine = UserInhaled_Nicotine * Fpulm_ret_Nicotine
  • Inputs:
  • UserInhaled_Nicotine: Estimated total nicotine inhaled by the user (µg) from step 3.1.
  • Fpulm_ret_Nicotine: Assumed pulmonary retention fraction for nicotine (e.g., 0.97) from Table 2.
  • Output: UserAbsorbed_Nicotine (µg). This value should be converted to mg (divide by 1000) for the equivalence calculation.

4.3. Bystander Absorbed Nicotine Calculation

  • Formula: BystanderAbsorbed_Nicotine = BystanderInhaled_Nicotine * Fpulm_ret_bystander_Nicotine
  • Assumption: It is assumed that the bystander’s pulmonary retention fraction for inhaled nicotine (Fpulm_ret_bystander_Nicotine) is similar to the user’s. A value of 0.97 is used. This is a simplification, as factors like particle size evolution in the room and different breathing patterns could influence bystander absorption efficiency. This assumption should be stated alongside the results. (See Table 2).
  • Inputs:
  • BystanderInhaled_Nicotine: Estimated total nicotine inhaled by the bystander (µg) from step 3.3.
  • Fpulm_ret_bystander_Nicotine: Assumed bystander retention fraction (0.97).
  • Output: BystanderAbsorbed_Nicotine (µg). Convert to mg (divide by 1000) for the equivalence calculation.

4.4. Cigarette Equivalent Calculation

  • Formula (User): CigEquivalent_User = UserAbsorbed_Nicotine (mg) / Nicotine_per_Cigarette (mg)
  • Formula (Bystander): CigEquivalent_Bystander = BystanderAbsorbed_Nicotine (mg) / Nicotine_per_Cigarette (mg)
  • Inputs:
  • UserAbsorbed_Nicotine (mg): Calculated value from step 4.2.
  • BystanderAbsorbed_Nicotine (mg): Calculated value from step 4.3.
  • Nicotine_per_Cigarette (mg): Assumed value of 1.5 mg from step 4.1.
  • Output: CigEquivalent_User and CigEquivalent_Bystander (number of cigarettes). These values represent the estimated number of cigarettes that would need to be smoked to achieve a similar systemic nicotine dose.

Cigarette Equivalence Limitations

The calculation of cigarette equivalence based solely on nicotine provides a very narrow comparison. Cigarette smoke contains approximately 7,000 chemicals, including dozens of known carcinogens and numerous other toxicants generated by the combustion of tobacco.3 E-cigarette aerosol, while not harmless, contains significantly fewer chemical constituents, and levels of many key toxicants found in smoke are substantially lower or absent.1 Nicotine itself, while highly addictive and carrying cardiovascular risks, is not the primary driver of smoking-related cancers or respiratory diseases like COPD.37 Therefore, equating vaping exposure to cigarette smoking based only on nicotine intake offers an incomplete and potentially misleading perspective on the comparative overall health risks. Vaping carries its own set of risks, including exposure to potentially harmful substances like aldehydes, metals, and flavorings, and impacts on respiratory and cardiovascular health.2 This critical context must be presented alongside the cigarette equivalence output in the calculator’s disclaimer section.

  • Table 2: Model Assumptions Summary
ParameterValue UsedUnitJustification/Reference(s)
User Pulmonary Retention (Nicotine)0.97(fraction)High retention observed 23
User Pulmonary Retention (PM2.5)0.5(fraction)Assumed moderate retention for particles/bulk aerosol 25
User Pulmonary Retention (PG/VG)0.5(fraction)Assumed moderate retention for main aerosol components 25
User Pulmonary Retention (Formaldehyde)0.7(fraction)Assumed moderate-to-high retention for reactive gas; High uncertainty
Bystander Pulmonary Retention (Nicotine)0.97(fraction)Assumed similar to user; Simplification
Assumed Air Changes per Hour (ACH)0.5h⁻¹Represents low ventilation condition as requested
Bystander Breathing Rate (BR_bystander)0.72m³/hrStandard value for adult at rest/light activity (12 L/min) 32
Nicotine Absorbed per Cigarette1.5mg/cigaretteMidpoint of typical range (1-2 mg) reported in literature 40

5. Implementation Guidance (HTML/JavaScript)

5.1. HTML Structure

The webpage should be structured using standard HTML5 elements.

  • Inputs:
  • Use <input type=”range”> elements for the Room Volume, Vaping Duration, and Vaping Intensity sliders. Assign unique IDs to each slider (e.g., id=”volumeSlider”, id=”durationSlider”, id=”intensitySlider”).
  • Include <label> elements clearly identifying each slider.
  • Use <span> or <output> elements adjacent to each slider, linked via for attribute or nested, to display the current numerical value (for Volume and Duration) or qualitative level (Low/Medium/High for Intensity). Assign unique IDs for updating these displays (e.g., id=”volumeValue”, id=”durationValue”, id=”intensityValue”).
  • Outputs:
  • Create distinct <div> or <span> elements to display the calculated results. Assign unique IDs to each output element for easy targeting by JavaScript (e.g., id=”userInhaledNicotine”, id=”bystanderConcPM25″, id=”bystanderInhaledPGVG”, id=”userCigEquiv”, etc.).
  • Clearly label each output value (e.g., “User Inhaled Nicotine:”, “Bystander Avg. PM2.5 Conc.:”).
  • Specify the units for each output (e.g., µg, µg/m³, cigarettes).
  • Disclaimers: Reserve a prominent section (e.g., a <div> with a distinct class or ID at the top or bottom of the calculator interface) for displaying the essential disclaimers and limitations outlined in Section 7. Ensure this text is easily readable.

5.2. JavaScript Logic

The core functionality will reside in JavaScript code.

  • Event Listeners: Attach ‘input’ event listeners to each slider (volumeSlider, durationSlider, intensitySlider). These listeners should trigger a main function that reads all inputs, performs calculations, and updates the output display whenever any slider value changes.
  • Parameter Storage:
  • Store the fixed model assumptions from Table 2 in a JavaScript object (e.g., const assumptions = { fpulm_nic: 0.97,… };).
  • Store the intensity-dependent parameters from Table 1 in a nested object or array for easy lookup based on the intensity slider’s value (1, 2, or 3) (e.g., const intensityParams = { 1: { f: 2, apuff_nic: 30,… }, 2: {… }, 3: {… } };).
  • readInputs() Function: Create a function that reads the current .value property of each slider element and returns these values (Volume, Duration, Intensity level).
  • calculateExposure() Function: This central function performs all calculations.
  • Accepts the input values (V, T, Intensity level) as arguments.
  • Retrieves the correct f and Apuff_X values from intensityParams based on the Intensity level.
  • Retrieves necessary fixed assumptions from the assumptions object.
  • Implements the formulas from Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4, calculating TotalPuffs, UserInhaled_X, EmissionRate_X, C_X (using the chosen scaling model), BystanderInhaled_X, UserAbsorbed_Nicotine, BystanderAbsorbed_Nicotine, CigEquivalent_User, and CigEquivalent_Bystander.
  • Include checks for potential errors, such as division by zero if Volume (V) could theoretically be zero.
  • Returns an object containing all calculated output values, clearly named (e.g., { userInhaledNicotine:…, bystanderConcPM25:…,… }).
  • updateOutputs() Function:
  • Accepts the results object from calculateExposure() as an argument.
  • Selects each output HTML element using its ID (e.g., document.getElementById(‘userInhaledNicotine’)).
  • Updates the textContent or innerHTML of each output element with the corresponding calculated value from the results object.
  • Use methods like toFixed() to format numerical outputs to an appropriate number of decimal places (e.g., 1 or 2).
  • Initialization: On page load, call the readInputs(), calculateExposure(), and updateOutputs() functions once to display results based on the sliders’ default initial positions.

5.3. Units

Maintain consistency in units throughout the JavaScript calculations. For instance, ensure time units are consistent (e.g., convert duration T from minutes to hours when calculating bystander dose using BR_bystander in m³/hr). Convert mass units where necessary (e.g., µg to mg for cigarette equivalence). Clearly label the units displayed in the HTML output elements.

6. Refinement of Component Estimates & Uncertainties

The estimation of PG/VG and Formaldehyde carries particularly high uncertainty due to data limitations and inherent variability.

6.1. PG/VG

  • Data & Variability: Propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG) are the primary constituents of most e-liquids and dominate the aerosol mass.12 However, specific data on the amount emitted per puff (Apuff_PGVG) is less readily available compared to nicotine. Available concentration data varies widely.5 Furthermore, the relative amounts of PG and VG emitted, and their subsequent behavior (e.g., evaporation rate), depend significantly on the PG/VG ratio in the e-liquid, device power, and temperature.9 PG is generally more volatile than VG.12
  • Recommendation: The Apuff_PGVG values provided in Table 1 represent rough estimates of the total mass of these bulk components aerosolized per puff under different intensity scenarios. The calculator cannot differentiate between PG and VG or account for the specific PG/VG ratio based on the simplified “Intensity” input. This limitation must be explicitly stated in the disclaimers. The PG/VG output should be clearly labeled as a combined estimate with high uncertainty.

6.2. Formaldehyde

  • Data & Variability: Formaldehyde is not typically an intended ingredient but is formed via thermal degradation of PG and VG during the heating process.12 Its presence in vape aerosol is well-documented. However, emission levels are extremely sensitive to device power/voltage and coil temperature.13 Critically, very high levels of formaldehyde (reported as 5-15 times higher than cigarettes, or even more) are primarily associated with “dry puff” conditions – situations where the e-liquid supply to the coil is insufficient, leading to overheating and an unpleasant, acrid taste that users typically avoid.13 Under realistic operating conditions (avoiding dry puffs), formaldehyde emissions are substantially lower, potentially less than or comparable to levels from conventional cigarettes.13
  • Recommendation: The Apuff_Formaldehyde values in Table 1 are intended to reflect levels potentially generated under realistic use conditions, explicitly excluding dry puff scenarios. However, the actual emission remains highly uncertain and variable, heavily dependent on device characteristics and user behavior not captured by the “Intensity” slider. The formaldehyde output must be accompanied by a strong specific disclaimer highlighting this extreme uncertainty. Consideration could be given to presenting it as a broad potential range rather than a single point estimate, or omitting it entirely if the uncertainty is deemed too high for a meaningful estimation within this tool’s framework. Including it, even with caveats, serves an educational purpose about potential toxicant formation.

6.3. Other Components

The calculator focuses on four key components. It is important to acknowledge that e-cigarette aerosol is a complex mixture containing numerous other potentially harmful substances not quantified by this tool. These include other aldehydes (e.g., acetaldehyde, acrolein), various volatile organic compounds (VOCs, including benzene and toluene), heavy metals originating from the device components (e.g., nickel, lead, chromium, tin), flavor chemicals (some of which, like diacetyl, are linked to lung disease), and tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Mentioning these in the disclaimers reinforces that the calculator provides only a partial assessment of potential chemical exposure.

7. Essential Disclaimers and Limitations

The following points must be communicated clearly and prominently on the calculator webpage to ensure users understand the context, limitations, and appropriate interpretation of the results.

  • Core Message: “Disclaimer: This calculator provides rough estimates based on simplified models and numerous assumptions. It is intended for educational and illustrative purposes only and should NOT be used for medical assessment, legal purposes, or precise exposure quantification. Actual exposure to vape aerosol components can vary significantly from these estimates.”
  • Key Uncertainties and Limitations:
  • Model Simplification: The calculations rely on simplified average concentration models (scaling or basic box model) that do not capture complex real-world factors like variable air mixing, specific room geometries, surface interactions (deposition/re-emission), or precise ventilation patterns.35 The assumption of a constant low air exchange rate (ACH = 0.5 h⁻¹) represents a specific scenario and may not reflect actual conditions.
  • Intensity Parameter: The single “Vaping Intensity” slider is a major simplification. Real-world emissions depend complexly on the specific device, e-liquid (nicotine strength, PG/VG ratio, flavors), power settings, and individual puffing behavior (frequency, duration, depth).7 The predefined parameters for Low/Medium/High (Table 1) represent archetypes, and actual emissions in any given situation may differ substantially.
  • Source Variability: Emissions vary significantly between different e-cigarette products and even between puffs from the same device.7 This tool cannot account for this wide variability.
  • Component-Specific Issues:
  • PM2.5 Dynamics: Vape aerosol particles (PM2.5) are known to evaporate and decay very rapidly (within seconds to minutes) after exhalation. This model estimates an average concentration and does not fully capture these rapid dynamics. Actual peak concentrations near the vaper may be higher, while the persistent room average may be lower than estimated.
  • Formaldehyde: Formaldehyde estimates are highly uncertain. Emissions depend strongly on device temperature/power and are dramatically increased under “dry puff” conditions (overheating), which are typically avoided by users.13 The estimate provided assumes realistic use but carries significant uncertainty.
  • PG/VG: The combined PG/VG estimate does not account for the specific ratio in the e-liquid, which influences aerosol properties and potential effects.9
  • Parameter Assumptions: The results depend on the fixed assumed values for pulmonary retention fractions, bystander breathing rate, and nicotine absorbed per cigarette (Table 2). These are based on average estimates from literature and are subject to individual variability.
  • Cigarette Equivalence: This comparison is based ONLY on absorbed nicotine dose and DOES NOT reflect equivalent overall health risk. Cigarette smoke contains thousands of additional toxic and carcinogenic chemicals produced by combustion that are absent or present at much lower levels in e-cigarette aerosol.1 While vaping is generally considered less harmful than smoking, it is not risk-free.38
  • Health Warning: “Vaping is not harmless. E-cigarette aerosol exposes users and bystanders to potentially harmful substances, including nicotine, ultrafine particles, heavy metals, and volatile organic compounds.3 Nicotine is highly addictive and can harm adolescent brain development and fetal development.3 Exposure to secondhand aerosol can cause or worsen respiratory conditions like asthma. There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand aerosol. Quitting all tobacco and nicotine products is the best way to protect health.”
  • Not Medical Advice: “This tool does not provide medical advice. Consult with a healthcare professional regarding any health concerns related to vaping or nicotine use.”

8. Conclusion

This document provides detailed instructions for creating a web-based calculator to estimate potential user and bystander exposure to selected vape aerosol components. The calculator is based on simplified models informed by scientific literature. Key parameters for nicotine, PM2.5, PG/VG, and formaldehyde emissions are defined based on a qualitative “Intensity” input, acknowledging this as a major simplification. Models for user inhalation, bystander concentration (using a scaling approach adjusted for emission rate, volume, and duration, assuming low ventilation), and bystander inhalation are specified. A nicotine-based cigarette equivalence calculation is included, with strong caveats regarding its interpretation.

The implementation guidance covers HTML structure and JavaScript logic, emphasizing the storage of parameters and the functions required for reading inputs, performing calculations, and updating outputs. Significant uncertainties are highlighted, particularly concerning the dynamic behavior of PM2.5 and the high variability of formaldehyde emissions.

Crucially, the final tool must incorporate prominent disclaimers detailing its limitations, the simplified nature of the models, the variability in real-world exposures, and the established health risks of vaping and secondhand aerosol exposure. This calculator serves as an educational tool to illustrate potential exposure scenarios, not as a definitive risk assessment instrument.

9. References

Full citations should be included if available, otherwise list identifiers/URLs.]

(Note: Full citations were not provided in the input snippets, so only identifiers can be listed here as per the source material.)

Works cited

  1. Assessment of Respiratory Health Implications of Vaping: A …, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39398779/
  2. NIH-funded studies show damaging effects of vaping, smoking on …, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-funded-studies-show-damaging-effects-vaping-smoking-blood-vessels
  3. Health Effects of Vaping | Smoking and Tobacco Use – CDC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/e-cigarettes/health-effects.html
  4. Parents Know the Risks – CDC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/Parents-Know-the-Risks-TPs-508.pdf
  5. Room air constituent concentrations from use of electronic nicotine delivery systems and cigarettes using different ventilation conditions, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7814121/
  6. Secondhand Exposure to Vapors From Electronic Cigarettes – PMC, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4565991/
  7. Effects of User Puff Topography, Device Voltage, and Liquid Nicotine Concentration on Electronic Cigarette Nicotine Yield: Measurements and Model Predictions – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4837998/
  8. Nicotine delivery and cigarette equivalents from vaping a JUULpod – PubMed, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33762429/
  9. E-cigarette Solvent Ratio and Device Power Influence Ambient Air Particulate Matter – PMC, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8375624/
  10. Effects of propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, and nicotine on emissions and dynamics of electronic cigarette aerosols – PMC, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7590927/
  11. Full article: Transport phenomena governing nicotine emissions from electronic cigarettes: Model formulation and experimental investigation – Taylor & Francis Online, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02786826.2016.1257853
  12. Impact of e-liquid composition, coil temperature, and puff topography on the aerosol chemistry of electronic cigarettes – eScholarship.org, accessed April 9, 2025, https://escholarship.org/content/qt7rg2p1h2/qt7rg2p1h2_noSplash_ef7b9370da55c0078419c2df744fa542.pdf
  13. Aldehyde levels in e-cigarette aerosol: Findings from a replication study and from use of a new-generation – Montrose Environmental, accessed April 9, 2025, https://montrose-env.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Aldehyde-Levels-in-E-Cigarette-Aerosol-Findings-from-a-Replication-Study-and-from-Use-of-a-New-Generation-Device-1.pdf
  14. (PDF) Temperature dependence of emission product distribution from vaping of vitamin E acetate – ResearchGate, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359458847_Temperature_dependence_of_emission_product_distribution_from_vaping_of_vitamin_E_acetate
  15. Influence of E-Liquid Humectants, Nicotine, and Flavorings on Aerosol Particle Size Distribution and Implications for Modeling Respiratory Deposition – Frontiers, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2022.782068/full
  16. E-cigarettes emit very high formaldehyde levels only in conditions that are aversive to users – Sci-Hub, accessed April 9, 2025, https://sci-hub.se/tree/53/cf/53cf25188fbab4b165d737c42fb547db.pdf
  17. E-cigarettes emit very high formaldehyde levels only in conditions that are aversive to users: A replication study under verified realistic use conditions | Request PDF – ResearchGate, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319420350_E-cigarettes_emit_very_high_formaldehyde_levels_only_in_conditions_that_are_aversive_to_users_A_replication_study_under_verified_realistic_use_conditions
  18. Effects of propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, and nicotine on emissions and dynamics of electronic cigarette aerosols | Request PDF – ResearchGate, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341660039_Effects_of_propylene_glycol_vegetable_glycerin_and_nicotine_on_emissions_and_dynamics_of_electronic_cigarette_aerosols
  19. Understanding Vape Puffs and Puff Testing – Refilla, accessed April 9, 2025, https://refillavape.com/blogs/the-refilla-blog/understanding-vape-puffs-and-puff-testing
  20. Vape vs Cigarette Nicotine: How Many 5% Vape Puffs Equal One Cig? – Vaporesso, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.vaporesso.com/blog/how-many-vape-puffs-equal-one-cig
  21. CORESTA RECOMMENDED METHOD Nº 81, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.coresta.org/sites/default/files/technical_documents/main/CRM_81.pdf
  22. Differences in nicotine intake and effects from electronic and combustible cigarettes among dual users, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7339816/
  23. Secondhand Nicotine Absorption From E-Cigarette Vapor vs Tobacco Smoke in Children, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11240186/
  24. Identification and Quantification of Electronic Cigarette Exhaled Aerosol Residue Chemicals in Field Sites – PubMed Central, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6410739/
  25. The Health Risks of Electronic Cigarette Use to Bystanders – MDPI, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/9/1525
  26. How a debate over vaping might derail the war on tobacco | AP News, accessed April 8, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/vaping-debate-philanthropy-smoke-free-1ae3a5d6aa29962bb82281e128cc4e76
  27. E-Cigarette and Environment – MDPI, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/12/3/72
  28. Measuring PM2. 5, Ultrafine Particles, Nicotine Air and Wipe …, accessed April 9, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/19/9/1055/3064154
  29. Characteristics of secondhand electronic cigarette aerosols from active human use, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02786826.2017.1355548
  30. 18.6.9 Exposure to secondhand e-cigarette emissions – Tobacco in Australia, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-18-e-cigarettes/18-6-the-health-effects-of-e-cigarette-use/18-6-9-exposure-to-secondhand-e-cigarette-emissions
  31. Characterization of the Spatial and Temporal Dispersion Differences …, accessed April 9, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/10/1371/5040053
  32. The physics of human breathing: flow, timing, volume, and pressure parameters for normal, on-demand, and ventilator respiration – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8672270/
  33. Vital signs: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia, accessed April 9, 2025, https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002341.htm
  34. Secondary indoor air pollution and passive smoking associated with cannabis smoking using electric cigarette device–demonstrative in silico study | PLOS Computational Biology, accessed April 9, 2025, https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009004
  35. Electronic Cigarettes and Indoor Air Quality: A Simple Approach to …, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4306862/
  36. Electronic Cigarettes and Indoor Air Quality: A Simple Approach to Modeling Potential Bystander Exposures to Nicotine – ResearchGate, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270291939_Electronic_Cigarettes_and_Indoor_Air_Quality_A_Simple_Approach_to_Modeling_Potential_Bystander_Exposures_to_Nicotine
  37. Evidence update on the cancer risk of vaping e-cigarettes: A …, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.tobaccoinduceddiseases.org/Evidence-update-on-the-cancer-risk-of-vaping-e-cigarettes-A-systematic-review,192934,0,2.html
  38. Vaping substantially less harmful than smoking, largest review of its …, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/vaping-substantially-less-harmful-than-smoking-largest-review-of-its-kind-finds
  39. The Chemical Complexity of e-Cigarette Aerosols Compared With the Smoke From a Tobacco Burning Cigarette – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8514950/
  40. How Much Nicotine Is in a Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products? – Healthline, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.healthline.com/health/how-much-nicotine-is-in-a-cigarette
  41. Nicotine Chemistry, Metabolism, Kinetics and Biomarkers – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 9, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2953858/
  42. Amount of nicotine in one cigarette – MedicalNewsToday, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/how-much-nicotine-is-in-one-cigarette
  43. How much nicotine do I receive from a cigarette? – Nicotinell, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.nicotinell.co.uk/faqs/how-much-nicotine-is-in-a-cigarette.html
  44. Composition of electronic cigarette aerosol – Wikipedia, accessed April 8, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_electronic_cigarette_aerosol
  45. What’s in an E-Cigarette? | American Lung Association, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/e-cigarettes-vaping/whats-in-an-e-cigarette
  46. Vaping myths and the facts – Better Health – NHS, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.nhs.uk/better-health/quit-smoking/ready-to-quit-smoking/vaping-to-quit-smoking/vaping-myths-and-the-facts/
  47. Is vaping harmful? | Vaping side effects – Cancer Research UK, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/smoking-and-cancer/is-vaping-harmful
  48. E-cigarettes and Vaping | Health Risks of E-cigarettes | American Cancer Society, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/tobacco/e-cigarettes-vaping.html
  49. Cardiovascular health effects of vaping e-cigarettes: a systematic …, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40010935/
  50. E-Cigarettes and Cardiopulmonary Health: Review for Clinicians | Circulation – AHA Journals, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056777
  51. Cardiorespiratory and Immunologic Effects of Electronic Cigarettes – PMC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7935224/
  52. Is vaping better than smoking for cardiorespiratory and muscle function? – PMC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7348661/
  53. Health effects and known pathology associated with the use of E-cigarettes – PMC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9764206/
  54. Electronic Cigarette Use and the Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases – PMC – PubMed Central, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9021536/
  55. E-Cigarettes: Use, Effects on Smoking, Risks, and Policy Implications – PMC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6251310/
  56. An Assessment of Indoor Air Quality before, during and after Unrestricted Use of E-Cigarettes in a Small Room – ResearchGate, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276425160_An_Assessment_of_Indoor_Air_Quality_before_during_and_after_Unrestricted_Use_of_E-Cigarettes_in_a_Small_Room
  57. Secondhand Electronic-Cigarette Aerosol and Indoor Air Quality | US EPA, accessed April 9, 2025, https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/secondhand-electronic-cigarette-aerosol-and-indoor-air-quality
  58. Electronic Smoking Devices and Secondhand Aerosol – American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation | no-smoke.org, accessed April 9, 2025, https://no-smoke.org/electronic-smoking-devices-secondhand-aerosol/
  59. Youth Know the Risks: | CDC, accessed April 8, 2025, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/pdfs/Youth-Know-the-Risks-TPs-508_1.pdf
  60. FDA tobacco official is removed from post in latest blow to health agency’s leadership, accessed April 8, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/fda-tobacco-rfk-brian-king-cf2d5657e5d55410073aece19592be09

Similar Posts