%0 Journal Article
%T Particulate matter (PM) 2.5 levels in ETS emissions of a Marlboro Red cigarette in comparison to the 3R4F reference cigarette under open- and closed-door condition
%A Daniel Mueller
%A Johannes Schulze
%A Hanns Ackerman
%A Doris Klingelhoefer
%A Stefanie Uibel
%A David A Groneberg
%J Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
%D 2012
%I BioMed Central
%R 10.1186/1745-6673-7-14
%X The aim of this study was to determine the ETS-dependent concentration of PM from both a 3R4F reference cigarette (RC) as well as a Marlboro Red brand cigarette (MRC) in a small enclosed space under different conditions of ventilation to model car exposure.In order to create ETS reproducibly, an emitter (ETSE) was constructed and mounted on to an outdoor telephone booth with an inner volume of 1.75 m3. Cigarettes were smoked under open- and closed-door condition to imitate different ventilation scenarios. PM2.5 concentration was quantified by a laser aerosol spectrometer (Grimm; Model 1.109), and data were adjusted for baseline values. Simultaneously indoor and outdoor climate parameters were recorded. The time of smoking was divided into the ETS generation phase (subset ¡°emission¡±) and a declining phase of PM concentration (subset ¡°elimination¡±); measurement was terminated after 10 min. For all three time periods the average concentration of PM2.5 (Cmean-PM2.5) and the area under the PM2.5 concentration curve (AUC-PM2.5) was calculated. The maximum concentration (Cmax-PM2.5) was taken from the total interval.For both cigarette types open-door ventilation reduced the AUC-PM2.5 (RC: from 59 400£¿¡À£¿14 600 to 5 550£¿¡À£¿3 900 ¦Ìg*sec/m3; MRC: from 86 500£¿¡À£¿32 000 to 7 300£¿¡À£¿2 400 ¦Ìg*sec/m3; p£¿<£¿0.001) and Cmean-PM2.5 (RC: from 600£¿¡À£¿150 to 56£¿¡À£¿40 ¦Ìg/m3, MRC from 870£¿¡À£¿320 to 75£¿¡À£¿25 ¦Ìg/m3; p£¿<£¿0.001) by about 90%. Cmax-PM2.5 was reduced by about 80% (RC: from 1 050£¿¡À£¿230 to 185£¿¡À£¿125 ¦Ìg/m3; MRC: from 1 560 ¡À500 ¦Ìg/m3 to 250£¿¡À£¿85 ¦Ìg/m3; p£¿<£¿0.001). In the subset ¡°emission¡± we identified a 78% decrease in AUC-PM2.5 (RC: from 18 600£¿¡À£¿4 600 to 4 000£¿¡À£¿2 600 ¦Ìg*sec/m3; MRC: from 26 600£¿¡À£¿7 200 to 5 800£¿¡À£¿1 700 ¦Ìg*sec/m3; p£¿<£¿0.001) and Cmean-PM2.5 (RC: from 430£¿¡À£¿108 to 93£¿¡À£¿60 ¦Ìg/m3; MRC: from 620£¿¡À£¿170 to 134£¿¡À£¿40 ¦Ìg/m3; p£¿<£¿0.001). In the subset ¡°elimination¡± we found a reduction of about 96¨C98% for AUC-PM2.5 (RC: from 40 800£¿¡À£¿11 100 to 1 500£¿¡À£¿1 700 ¦Ìg*sec/m3; MRC: from 5
%U http://www.occup-med.com/content/7/1/14/abstract