4.6 Article

Aerosol Gas-Phase Components from Cannabis E-Cigarettes and Dabbing: Mechanistic Insight and Quantitative Risk Analysis

Journal

ACS OMEGA
Volume 4, Issue 14, Pages 16111-16120

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.9b02301

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Portland State University
  2. National Institute of Health
  3. Food and Drug Administration [R01ES025257]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Consumption of cannabis by nontraditional methods has surged since the advent of legalization in North America and worldwide. Inhaling cannabis extracts using vaporizers and via dabbing has risen in popularity, while concerns over product safety have not hindered their proliferation. The work herein is the first step toward assessing the safety of vaporizing and dabbing concentrated cannabis extracts as a function of gas-phase reaction products. The gas-phase thermal degradants of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) have not been previously investigated. It was found that users may be exposed to concerning degradants such as methacrolein, benzene, and methyl vinyl ketone when using cartridge vaporizers and dabbing. It was shown that THC alone and mixed with terpenes generated similar degradation products and, most notably, elevated levels of isoprene. Importantly, it was shown that added terpenes led to higher levels of gas-phase products compared to THC alone. To estimate cancer and noncancer risks associated with exposure to these and other degradants, quantitative risk assessment was applied to experimentally determined values for dabbing and vaping and literature-sourced levels of hazardous components in cannabis smoke. Overall, gas-phase aerosol products had significantly lower values in dabbing and vaporizing compared to cannabis smoking, although these results should be interpreted in light of potential variations in degradant levels due to disparate usage patterns and the dangers of the higher aerosol concentration of THC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available