Cargando…

Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?

BACKGROUND: Very few studies have evaluated the adverse effect of passive smoking exposure among active smokers, probably due to the unproven assumption that the dose of toxic compounds that a smoker inhales by passive smoke is negligible compared to the dose inhaled by active smoke. METHODS: In a c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Piccardo, Maria Teresa, Stella, Anna, Valerio, Federico
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20113464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-5
_version_ 1782177672788443136
author Piccardo, Maria Teresa
Stella, Anna
Valerio, Federico
author_facet Piccardo, Maria Teresa
Stella, Anna
Valerio, Federico
author_sort Piccardo, Maria Teresa
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Very few studies have evaluated the adverse effect of passive smoking exposure among active smokers, probably due to the unproven assumption that the dose of toxic compounds that a smoker inhales by passive smoke is negligible compared to the dose inhaled by active smoke. METHODS: In a controlled situation of indoor active smoking, we compared daily benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) dose, estimated to be inhaled by smokers due to the mainstream (MS) of cigarettes they have smoked, to the measured environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) they inhaled in an indoor environment. For this aim, we re-examined our previous study on daily personal exposure to BaP of thirty newsagents, according to their smoking habits. RESULTS: Daily BaP dose due to indoor environmental contamination measured inside newsstands (traffic emission and ETS produced by smoker newsagents) was linearly correlated (p = 0.001 R(2 )= 0.62) with estimated BaP dose from MS of daily smoked cigarettes. In smoker subjects, the percentage of BaP daily dose due to ETS, in comparison to mainstream dose due to smoked cigarettes, was estimated with 95% confidence interval, between 14.6% and 23% for full flavour cigarettes and between 21% and 34% for full flavour light cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: During indoor smoking, ETS contribution to total BaP dose of the same smoker, may be not negligible. Therefore both active and passive smoking exposures should be considered in studies about health of active smokers.
format Text
id pubmed-2823725
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28237252010-02-18 Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible? Piccardo, Maria Teresa Stella, Anna Valerio, Federico Environ Health Research BACKGROUND: Very few studies have evaluated the adverse effect of passive smoking exposure among active smokers, probably due to the unproven assumption that the dose of toxic compounds that a smoker inhales by passive smoke is negligible compared to the dose inhaled by active smoke. METHODS: In a controlled situation of indoor active smoking, we compared daily benzo(a)pyrene (BaP) dose, estimated to be inhaled by smokers due to the mainstream (MS) of cigarettes they have smoked, to the measured environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) they inhaled in an indoor environment. For this aim, we re-examined our previous study on daily personal exposure to BaP of thirty newsagents, according to their smoking habits. RESULTS: Daily BaP dose due to indoor environmental contamination measured inside newsstands (traffic emission and ETS produced by smoker newsagents) was linearly correlated (p = 0.001 R(2 )= 0.62) with estimated BaP dose from MS of daily smoked cigarettes. In smoker subjects, the percentage of BaP daily dose due to ETS, in comparison to mainstream dose due to smoked cigarettes, was estimated with 95% confidence interval, between 14.6% and 23% for full flavour cigarettes and between 21% and 34% for full flavour light cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: During indoor smoking, ETS contribution to total BaP dose of the same smoker, may be not negligible. Therefore both active and passive smoking exposures should be considered in studies about health of active smokers. BioMed Central 2010-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC2823725/ /pubmed/20113464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-5 Text en Copyright ©2010 Piccardo et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Piccardo, Maria Teresa
Stella, Anna
Valerio, Federico
Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title_full Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title_fullStr Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title_full_unstemmed Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title_short Is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
title_sort is the smokers exposure to environmental tobacco smoke negligible?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823725/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20113464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-9-5
work_keys_str_mv AT piccardomariateresa isthesmokersexposuretoenvironmentaltobaccosmokenegligible
AT stellaanna isthesmokersexposuretoenvironmentaltobaccosmokenegligible
AT valeriofederico isthesmokersexposuretoenvironmentaltobaccosmokenegligible