Month: January 2021

Posted on

Atomizing core: Ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time

The atomizing core is an important part of vapes, and the heating device that atomizes the e-liquid together with the e-cigarette determines the taste.

In the past, the mainstream was cotton core, which had the advantage of low price and good taste; the disadvantage was that it was prone to burn e-liquid and vape juice leakage, and it relied on labor and was difficult to industrialize and control quality.

Atomizing core: Ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time

Ceramic core has been developed and promoted in the past three years. The advantages are that it does not burn e-juice, has a low leakage rate, and is industrialized and mass-produced. The disadvantage is that the price is relatively high and the taste is good enough, but the taste of the product is improved after iteration, so the penetration rate of ceramic core is increased.

Through the human body deposition model of aerosol particles, we can see that the reason why the reduction degree of the cotton core is high is because the particles after atomization are larger, between 0.7 and 0.75 microns. The large-particle mist can not only produce the rich aroma in the nasal cavity, but also deposits in the oral cavity and throat, making the oral cavity more satisfying.

The ceramic core pursues the fineness of the mist particles, and the atomized particle size is between 0.5 and 0.55 microns. The particle size of such vapor is mainly felt by the olfactory cells in the nasal cavity, so everyone feels that the reduction degree is not enough.

Atomizing core: Ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time

In recent years, ceramic atomizing core has gained the favor of the market for its advantages of “no smell and durability”. Global market experienced the natural substitution of ceramic core to cotton core, while in China, ceramic core started. At present, some China brands are willing to increase the proportion of cotton core due to cost considerations.

But after research, it is believed that cotton core and ceramic core have their own advantages and disadvantages, and they will coexist for a long time!Atomizing core: Ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time

In reality, ceramic atomizing cores are mainly used for pod systems; cotton cores are the mainstream for disposable vapes.

For new customers, ceramic core has a lower taste reduction, but has better experience and fewer quality problems, so the acceptance is higher; for repurchase customers, ceramic core has formed a certain consumption habit.Atomizing core: Ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time

The current atomizing core leader is also studying the possibility of other materials, but no better material has been found so far. This will be the basic reason why ceramic core and cotton core will coexist for a long time.

Posted on

Framework to Estimate Total Particulate Mass and Nicotine Delivered to E-cig Users from Natural Environment Monitoring Data


We define the cumulative yield, YAC, of individual Aerosol Constituents (AC) of emissions delivered from an ENDS to the mouth of a user as the integral of the product of the time dependent mass ratio of the aerosol constituent, the Total Particulate Matter (TPM) concentration of the whole aerosol, and the user’s volumetric flow rate:

$${Y}_{{rm{AC}}}equiv {int }_{{t}_{{rm{initial}}}}^{{t}_{{rm{final}}}}{f}_{{rm{AC}}}(t){C}_{{rm{TPM}}}(t)dot{v}(t)dt$$

(1)

where the mass ratio of the constituent fAC(t) = mAC/mTPM [mg/mg] and TPM Concentration CTPM(t) = mTPM/v [mg/mL] (mass per volume) vary with time as a user changes puffing patterns, tobacco product choices, and user-selectable device settings. The constituents in the ENDS aerosol may be present in the un-puffed e-liquid, or generated as decomposition products. We normalize all aerosol constituents (including vapor phase constituents, compounds originating in the e-liquid, and thermal decomposition products) by the mass of TPM emissions to facilitate separation of variables between the fAC and CTPM terms. We posit the TPM concentration and mass ratio of constituents may be expressed as linearly independent functions of Product Characteristics (PC) and User Behavior Characteristics (UBC). Numerous ENDS PC may affect the CTPM including but not limited to the device operating power (reflected in coil wattage, amperage, or temperature), flow path geometry, coil design, and aspiration features. Additionally, the solvent composition of the e-liquid consumable (such as the PG/VG ratio which directly impacts the saturation temperature of the e-liquid) may impact CTPM. Additional consumable PC impacting fAC may include nicotine concentration, flavor additives, viscosity, and pH. Furthermore, a variety of UBC may affect the CTPM and/or fAC including puff duration, d, flow rate, q, volume, v, and interval, i:

$${C}_{{rm{TPM}}}={ {mathcal F} }_{{rm{TPM}}}(PC,UBC)$$

(2)

$${f}_{{rm{AC}}}={ {mathcal F} }_{{rm{AC}}}(PC,UBC)$$

(3)

For the current study we limit variability in PC by selecting a single ENDS with no user-adjustable settings and a single e-liquid. We thus focus on the interaction between UBC and the flow path PC, reflected by the topography parameters q and d, and consider a single AC, nicotine, to illustrate the approach. Prior work4 demonstrated a power law relationship between CTPM [mg/mL] and puff flow rate, q [mL/s]. Therefore, we propose the form of Eq. 4 to account for puff flow rate, q [mL/s], puff duration, d [s], and the product of those terms, which has physical significance as the puff volume v = q d [mL]. A transformation of variables enables a linear systems model describing the model-predicted TPM concentration, ({hat{{rm{C}}}}_{{rm{TPM}}}), of a single puff in terms of a set of empirical coefficients, b:

$$mathrm{ln}({hat{C}}_{{rm{TPM}}})={b}_{1}+{b}_{2},mathrm{ln}(q)+{b}_{3}(d)+{b}_{4}(mathrm{ln},{(q)}^{2})+{b}_{5},mathrm{ln}(d/1000)+{b}_{6}(qcdot d)$$

(4)

The experimental observations of CTPM can be computed as the ratio of the mass emissions captured on a filter pad per measured volume of aerosol passing through the pad. The coefficients in Eq. 4 may be estimated using ordinary least squares (OLS), weighted least squares (WLS), or other regression techniques. OLS regression is employed in the current work. Since the ENDS device chosen for the study does not have a user-selectable power setting, and the nicotine concentration of the e-liquid is held constant across all trials, we hypothesize a first order linear model, Eq. 5, for the model-predicted nicotine mass ratio, ({hat{{rm{f}}}}_{{rm{NIC}}}), as a function of puff flow rate, q.

$$widehat{{f}_{{rm{NIC}}}}={beta }_{1}+{beta }_{2}(q)$$

(5)

The regression coefficients, β, are also determined using OLS.



Source link

Posted on

EU E-Cig Study Criticized For Being Selective in Its Reported Findings


Despite all the scientific evidence to the contrary, the SCHEER said that e-cigarettes act as a Gateway to smoking.

The EC commissioned SCHEER review concluded that e-cigarettes pose health risks to the respiratory tract and cardiovascular system, while risks from the cumulative exposure to nitrosamines and aldehydes was found to be weak to moderate. Moreover, the researchers also reported weak to moderate risks from second hand vapour exposure.

Sadly, despite all the scientific evidence to the contrary, the SCHEER report also said that e-cigarettes act as a Gateway to smoking. “Regarding the role of electronic cigarettes as a gateway to smoking/the initiation of smoking, particularly for young people, the SCHEER concludes that there is strong evidence that electronic cigarettes are a gateway to smoking for young people. There is also strong evidence that nicotine in e-liquids is implicated in the development of addiction and that flavours have a relevant contribution for attractiveness of use of electronic cigarettes and initiation.”

Research indicating the effectiveness of e-cigs for smoking cessation refuted

Finally, the paper refutes all the research indicating the effectiveness of vaping products as smoking cessation devices and says that the evidence indicating this is weak. “Regarding the role of electronic cigarettes in cessation of traditional tobacco smoking, the SCHEER concludes that there is weak evidence for the support of electronic cigarettes’ effectiveness in helping smokers to quit while the evidence on smoking reduction is assessed as weak to moderate.”

For all these allegations, the paper was criticized for being selective in the findings it reported. However, the EC maintains that the study was based on the latest and up-to-date evidence. “The SCHEER committee takes into consideration the most recent and up-to-date scientific evidence and technical developments and, as appropriate, the existing provisions concerning e-cigarettes under the TPD (in particular Article 20(3)), and the evolution of new products on the market,” said an EU spokesperson.

“The scientific opinion addresses considerations relevant both at individual level and at population level, from a public health perspective and reply to specific questions from mandating DG only (cf. mandate),” added the spokesperson.

Naturally, renowned for its anti-vaping stance, the World Health Organisation (WHO) concurred. “However, it is too early to provide a clear answer on the long-term impact of using them or being exposed to them,” said the UN agency.

Ignoring scientific data

Meanwhile, multiple reliable public health entities such as Public Health England (PHE) insist on the relative benefits of the products. “Current vaping is mainly concentrated in young people who have experience of smoking. Less than 1% of young people who have never smoked are current vapers.”

Communicating with renowned and award winning researcher and professor Riccardo Polosa, who is also the director of the Center of Excellence for the acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR), European independent media network EURACTIV was informed that the “Opinion did not take much time to evaluate cessation – less than two pages in the report”.

Anyway a person can stop smoking is good

Soon after the paper was published, added Polosa, the “well-respected Cochrane review” came out with an update that suggested moderate evidence of effectiveness. “Science has a high bar for proof, which is right. At the same time, any way a person can stop smoking is good – chewing gum, sucking lollipops. It is well known in harm reduction that substitution is easier to achieve than abstinence, so that is why e-cigarettes have worked for many people to stop smoking,” he concluded.

New Study Links Nicotine Exposure to Breast Cancer Metastasis



Source link

Posted on

The debate over e-cigarettes demands stronger evidence of their value


A young man exhales a cloud of vapour from an e-cigarette

Over the past few years, e-cigarettes containing increased concentrations of nicotine have attracted users.Credit: Volodymyr Melnyk/Alamy

For more than half a century, the world has known that tobacco kills — yet it is still killing more than 8 million people a year. Tobacco use remains the world’s worst entirely preventable public-health emergency, and there is a desperate need for fresh ways to tackle it.

So it is little wonder that e-cigarettes have attracted attention as a potential solution. More than half of US adult smokers try to quit each year: in theory, e-cigarettes might boost their chances of success. It is generally agreed that vaping is safer than smoking conventional cigarettes.

But even as e-cigarette sales have boomed — the global market was worth US$11.3 billion in 2018 — concerns have mushroomed, and research has failed to keep up. Urgent questions about vaping remain: whether it really does help people to quit smoking, whether it serves as a gateway to cigarettes, and whether the liquid formulations have short- and long-term health effects. Until such questions are answered, it seems premature to advocate strongly for e-cigarette use, and imperative that regulators develop guidelines to limit vaping by adolescents.

A UK study published this year highlights the evidence gap. In a large randomized, controlled trial, researchers found that smokers who used e-cigarettes to help them quit were less likely to start smoking again for at least a year, compared with those who used other aids such as nicotine gum or patches1. The study was one of the most rigorous so far — yet the benefit was slight, and 75% of study participants had already tried and failed to quit using the other cessation aids, so it was less surprising that they failed again. Overall, studies have not found strong evidence for a benefit of e-cigarettes over other quitting strategies — including nicotine-replacement therapy combined with antidepressants.

It’s also hard to say whether recent results will translate to the real world, where e-cigarettes are changing fast. Over the past few years, US vapers have flocked to devices that contain nearly three times the European Union’s legal limit on nicotine concentration. The most concentrated pods of the popular devices, made by Juul of San Francisco, California, for example, contain as much nicotine as a pack of 20 cigarettes.

There is huge concern about the surge of vaping among young people, and the potentially addictive nature of such products, which have been backed by aggressive marketing campaigns. Vaping among high-school students in the United States (14–18 years old) rose 78% from 2017 to 2018. One out of every 5 high-school students — and nearly one out of every 20 middle-school students, typically 11–13 years old — has vaped at least once in the past month.

This could be a major health concern. Many studies have shown that adolescents who vape are more likely to take up smoking, but none has established a causal link. And the long-term effects of e-cigarettes — particularly ones with a high nicotine concentration — on young brains remain unknown.

With so few data, researchers’ debate over e-cigarettes has been divisive and sometimes emotional. Proponents of e-cigarettes see a way to help the millions who are trying to quit smoking and stem the grave harm caused by tobacco. Vaping critics — some of whom have received death threats after giving public talks critical of the devices — fear they could lose ground in the decades-long battle against tobacco and create a generation of e-cigarette addicts. They see the spectre of Big Tobacco — the five largest global tobacco companies — rising again. That fear was further fanned when tobacco giant and Marlboro-maker Altria of Richmond, Virginia, purchased 35% of Juul last year.

Studies showing that cigarettes cause lung cancer turned tobacco into an enemy of public health. Now researchers, research funders, public-health agencies and policymakers must unite to provide answers about e-cigarettes by designing better studies, repeating those that have been done already and simultaneously addressing the next generation of nicotine products.

There are reports that manufacturers are looking at ways to increase the voltage of their devices, and so deliver more nicotine without raising the nicotine concentration of their juice — a way of sidestepping EU limits on nicotine content. And other devices are coming online: in Japan, cigarette smokers are increasingly using electronic products that heat tobacco without burning it, and the US Food and Drug Administration approved its first such product in April.

The right policies on e-cigarettes — ones that minimize risks — will be built on evidence and collaboration, not on opinion and vitriol. It might be too early to say whether e-cigarettes will make a major difference in helping adult smokers to quit. It’s the right time for regulators to protect the next generations from having to.



Source link

Posted on

First Big Tobacco cannabis player backs out after bankruptcy


Published January 21, 2021

The first Big Tobacco company to join the hemp and marijuana industries is getting back out.

Pyxus International, one of the world’s largest tobacco suppliers, said Thursday that it will focus on its more profitable tobacco and liquid nicotine products after filing for bankruptcy in June.

Based in Morrisville, North Carolina, Pyxus was growing hemp in the U.S. and marijuana in Canada. But the company was hard hit by declining tobacco consumption and coronavirus-sparked supply disruptions.

Pyxus’ Canadian subsidiaries, Figr Brands, were not part of the initial bankruptcy filing but have since filed for and received creditor protection. Pyxus is looking for a buyer for its Figr companies.

“We maintain our belief that there is value in FIGR, and its growth can be accelerated with the right capital structure and partner,” Pyxus CEO Pieter Sikkel said in a statement.

Pyxus, formerly Alliance One International, was part of the influx of Big Tobacco and Alcohol into the cannabis industry.

Pyxus trades on over-the-counter markets as PYXX.



Source link

Posted on

France: Vaporesso Works With Local Vape Shops to Support The Needy


With COVID-19 still raging throughout the country and most of the world, many people have been struggling financially and unable to cope, let alone celebrate any holidays with their families. Launched on Christmas Eve 2020, the Vaporesso initiative involved distributing relief supplies to local communities in collaboration with 17 vape shops around France, with the intention of helping people who have been negatively affected by the pandemic.

“At Vaporesso, we take being a positive corporate citizen very seriously. Doing what we can to give back to the community is part of our global mission to make the world a better place,” said Vaporesso Global Marketing Director, Niki Zhang.

Throughout the pandemic France has had a comprehensive policy on tobacco. The Ministry of Health had issued a legal decree explicitly allowing tobacco and e-cigarette shops to remain open, adding them to a detailed list of essential businesses allowed to operate.

The UK faces the 3rd lockdown

Meanwhile, across the English Channel, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has recently announced the third lockdown in England, which started earlier this month and will last until around mid-February. Once again, this sadly includes vape shops

The UK fully endorses the use of vapes as smoking cessation and/or harm reduction tools, and it is a well known fact that the pressures brought about by the pandemic are leading to a lot of smoking relapses. To this effect, public health experts have been pointing out that closing vape shops at this time is particularly nonsensical. Only last October, the government-funded campaign – Stoptober, was urging smokers to quit cigarettes by switching to vaping.

“Only last month the Government-backed Stoptober campaign was encouraging smokers to quit, including through taking up vaping. Those who took up the challenge during the month now do not have access to the same level of support and products from their local vape stores. We will be making these points strongly to the government on behalf of the industry and asking them to reconsider their stance on vape stores and reclassify them as essential in future,” argued John Dunne, Director General of the UKVIA last November, ahead of the 2nd lockdown.

Vaporesso Launches “Together We Can!” Campaign



Source link

Posted on

RELX Phantom pod system review: a decent pod for real vaping

RELX Phantom pod system is a 5th generation product from RELX official after RELX Infinity, RELX i, RELX Alpha and RELX Classic. Because this product is not on sale on global market yet, we translated its name from Chines”幻影” directly. How is the experience with RELX Phantom vape? You’ll see it in the following review.

Related:

RELX 5th Generation pod vape Phantom is released

RELX Phantom pod system parameters:

Device size and overview:

RELX Phantom pod system review
RELX Phantom starter kit overview

Model: P53a

Battery capacity: 380 mAh

Pod capacity: 1.9 ml (Larger than 1.45ml RELX i pod )

Pod nicotine content: 3%

Pod e-liquid ingredients: Glycerin, propylene glycol, fragrance, nicotine

Maximum charging current: 700 mA

Charging port: Type C

RELX Phantom pod system package content

Because the device and pods are separately packaged, so there are 2 packages in total:

Device package

1 device, 1 type C charging cable,1 user manual

Pod package

3 pods in a pack/box.

Observing from the appearance of the pod, it’s still made with FEELM atomizing core(SuperSmooth Technology), with QR code for product genuineness checking.

RELX Phantom pod system user experience

This starter kit from RELX is almost perfect for vaping. The following are the reasons.

1, The taste of RELX Phantom is perfect. The flavor I tried is Strawberry Ice and Peach Tea (13 flavors available for choosing). It’s delicious and fragrant, smooth and silky, consistent vaping experience from first puff to last puff. It’s impressive and outstanding among so many pod vapes.

You just can’t stop vaping it for its excellent taste so the biggest downside of RELX Phantom to the author is unintentionally overdosing. However, most other adult vapers could take good care of it, it’s not a big deal.

2. The 360mAh battery capacity is larger compared to the classic device. It’s more durable to support a whole day’s vaping need.

3. The vape body is sleek and smooth. Comfortable on hand.

4. There is an indicator LED while charging and vaping, looking beautiful and intuitive.

5. Appropriate vaping resistance and vapor amount. The vapor amount is not too large, nor too small, it’s just right.

6. No Leakage or condensation during use.

7. Its pod is compatible with RELX infinity. Convenient for switching devices from RELX i.

8. Fast charge type C port. About 10 minutes for a full charge.

Where to buy RELX Phantom pod system:

Not on sale: ask the RELX official for preorder

PS:

At the beginning of 2021, the author is busy selling vapes and barely have time to do reviews, sorry about the delay. There is still a mountain of vapes waiting in line for reviews for VAPE HK. Please hold on and we’ll soon review them one by one during the Chinese New Year holiday.

Posted on

The Effect of Electronic Cigarette User Modifications and E-liquid Adulteration on the Particle Size Profile of an Aerosolized Product


This study seeks to understand the relationship between various electronic cigarette modifications and the particle size profile of the aerosols generated by the device using a cascade impactor. The coil resistance, battery voltage, and the composition of the glycols in the e-liquid were varied to determine the impact on particle size formation. E-liquids using 12 mg/mL nicotine were evaluated as well as two e-liquids containing DOTNs, 60 mg/mL methamphetamine and methadone. Methamphetamine is a schedule II CNS stimulant with a history of smoking as a mode of administration. In recent years, arrests have been made with individuals having been found with methamphetamine inside their e-cigarette devices20. Methadone, a schedule II synthetic opioid in the same class of compounds as heroin, is primarily taken orally for opioid addiction maintenance. The liquid concentrate formulation of methadone is composed of propylene glycol, which is also a constituent in e-cigarette e-liquids21.

Reagents and supplies

Nicotine, methamphetamine hydrochloride, and methadone hydrochloride were purchased from Sigma Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). The vegetable glycerin and propylene glycol were purchased from Wizard Labs (Altamonte Springs, FL). The Kangertech replaceable atomizers were purchased from Discount Vapers (Oakville, CT), the AeroTank Clearomizer from My Vapor Store (Panama City, FL), and the e-go V v2 variable voltage battery from Vivid Smoke (Irvine, CA). Nicotine, methamphetamine, methadone, nicotine-d4, methamphetamine-d11, and methadone-d9 reference standards were all purchased from Cerilliant Corporations (Round Rock, TX). The methanol and 20 mL scintillation vials were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA). The Micro-Orifice Uniform Deposit Impactor (MOUDI) was purchased by MSP Corporation (Shoreview, MN). The flow meter was purchased from Dwyer (Michigan City, IN).

Particle size experiments

An AeroTank Clearomizer with a KangerTech pre-assembled atomizer was used in conjunction with an eGo-V2 variable voltage battery to develop a model for research, to easily control variables, and generate the condensation aerosol. This specific device was used due to its popularity in the United States at the time of purchase, and the atomizer was easy to adapt with typical user modifications, such as coil configurations.

Nicotine e-liquid formulations were prepared at 12 mg/mL in 50:50 PG:VG 100% PG, or 100% VG solution in order to measure the impact of PG and VG formulation on particle size. Coil resistance was set at 1.5, 1.8, or 2.2 Ω at 4.3 V. Common battery output voltages were set at 3.9, 4.3, or 4.7 V at 1.8 Ω, the most common resistance for this device. Methamphetamine and methadone e-liquid formulations were prepared at 60 mg/mL in 50:50 PG:VG solution to evaluate the impact of different drugs on particle size and generated with a device operated at the most common battery and resistance settings of 3.9, 4.3, or 4.7 V at 1.8 Ω. E-liquids were stored in a cabinet at room temperature until the experiments were started. The AeroTank clearomizers were filled at half capacity with e-liquid formulation at the day of the experiment and were vortexed prior to aerosol generation. The battery was charged the night prior to the experiments.

A 10-stage micro-orifice uniform deposit impactor (MOUDI), draws the sample through a cascading sequence of nozzles that deposit the aerosol onto plates, was used for particle size analysis8,9,10. Aluminum disks were placed on the plates for stages 1–9 of the MOUDI with filter paper placed on the final stage (stage 10). The mass of the AeroTank Clearomizer containing the e-liquid, each aluminum disk, and the filter were recorded pre- and post aerosolization. The 10-stage MOUDI was operated at a flow rate of 30 L/min. The e-cigarette mouthpiece was positioned flush with the USP induction port (simulated throat) which was connected to the inlet of the impactor to allow sampling of the e-cigarette aerosol. The e-liquids were undiluted. An aerosol was generated 6 times, 10 seconds each, for a single MOUDI collection and performed in triplicate. The particle size distribution data generated by the MOUDI was time-averaged data. Following each experiment, the aluminum disks and the filter were weighed and then were each placed into 20 mL scintillation vials and washed with 1 mL methanol. The USP induction port was washed with 1 mL methanol.

Particle size distributions of the glycols was determined gravimetrically. The change in weight of each aluminum disk and filter was used to determine the total mass of e-liquid collected in the MOUDI. The percent mass recovered on each MOUDI stage was determined for each trial (n = 3) and averaged.

Analysis of nicotine particle size samples by LC-MS/MS

A previously validated method was used to analyze nicotine concentrations on each stage of the MOUDI using a Quattro micro MS with a Shimadzu LC system (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). Chromatographic separation was achieved on an Agilent Polaris 5-Si A 50 × 3 mm, 5 μm column (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). The injection volume was 10 μL with a flow rate of 0.4 mL/min. The total run time for this method was 4.5 minutes and the instrument was operated in multiple reaction monitoring mode (MRM) for the following m/z transitions: Nicotine, 163 > 130 and 163 > 117; and nicotine-d4, 167 > 134. A seven-point calibration curve ranging 10–1000 ng/mL of nicotine, along with a blank, double blank control, and nicotine controls were analyzed. Controls were prepared as a limit of quantitation quality control (10 ng/mL), low quality control (30 ng/mL), mid quality control (300 ng/mL), and high quality control (900 ng/mL). The internal standard (100 ng/mL nicotine-d4) was added to each calibrator, blank, control, and samples. Dilutions of the samples were prepared to assure that all samples were bracketed within the calibration range.

Analysis of methamphetamine and methadone particle size samples by GC/MS

An Agilent 6890 N Gas Chromatograph with a 5973 Mass Selective Detector (MSD) was used for chromatographic separation and detection using a HP-5MS 30 m × 0.25 mm id × 0.25 μm column (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) and helium carrier gas.

For methamphetamine, the GC/MS was operated in split mode at 6:1 ratio and a 1 μL injection volume. The helium carrier gas had a flow rate of 35 cm/s and the inlet temperature was set to 275 °C. The GC oven had an initial temperature of 120 °C with a ramp rate of 10 °C/min until 200 °C before undergoing a second temperature ramp of 30 °C/min until 280 °C. The total run time was 10.67 minutes. The MSD was operated in select ion monitoring (SIM) mode with 58, 64, 91, 96, and 134 m/z as the selected ions and the quantitation was performed using 58 and 64 m/z as the quantitative ions for methamphetamine and methamphetamine-d11 respectively. A six-point calibration curve ranging from 100–2000 ng/mL of methamphetamine, along with a blank, double blank control, and methamphetamine controls were analyzed. Controls were prepared with a limit of quantitation quality control (100 ng/mL), low quality control (150 ng/mL), mid quality control (600 ng/mL), and high quality control (1500 ng/mL). The internal standard (500 ng/mL methamphetamine-d11) was added to each calibrator, blank, control, and samples. Dilutions of the samples were prepared to ensure all samples were bracketed within the calibration range.

For methadone, the GC/MS was operated in split mode at 20:1 ratio and a 1 μL injection volume. The helium carrier gas had a flow rate of 39 cm/s and the inlet temperature was set to 275 °C. The GC oven had an initial temperature of 225 °C with a temperature ramp of 15 °C/min until 285 °C for a total run time of 4 minutes. The MSD was run in SIM mode with the following ions monitored: 72, 223, 294, and 309 m/z for methadone and 78, 226, 303, and 318 m/z for methadone-d9 and quantitation was performed using 72 and 78 m/z as the quantitative ions for methadone and methadone-d9, respectively. A seven-point calibration curve ranging from 100–5000 ng/mL of methadone, along with a blank, double blank control, and methadone controls were analyzed. Controls were prepared with a limit of quantitation quality control (100 ng/mL), a low quality control (150 ng/L), a mid quality control (1000 ng/mL) and a high quality control (4500 ng/mL). The internal standard (500 ng/mL methadone-d9) was added to each calibrator, blank, control, and samples. Dilutions of the samples were prepared to ensure all samples were bracketed within the calibration range.

The geometric mean diameter (GMD), geometric standard deviation (GSD), and mass median diameter (MMAD) were calculated using the methods detailed by Ramachandran and Cooper22. Precision was evaluated by calculating each relative standard deviation for each replicate measurement. The threshold for statistical difference was set at a P-value of 0.05 (n = 3).



Source link

Posted on

USDA: Final hemp rules aren’t on hold — but new administration will review


Published January 22, 2021

Nationwide hemp rules released in the closing days of the Trump Administration aren’t on hold, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

But the agency will be reviewing all programs implemented by the previous administration, as is common when there is a new president.

USDA spokesman Matt Herrick told Hemp Industry Daily in an emailed statement that “we have no specific programs or rules to point to at this time that are on hold, but it’s proper for a new administration to have adequate time to review existing programs as well as those implemented by the previous administration in the final days of their tenure.”

He didn’t say whether hemp producers finalizing planting plans for 2021 should expect USDA to again open the rules for public comments.

The agency already re-opened them once, but some hemp activists are hoping USDA will take another round of feedback.

That’s because the White House issued a memo late Wednesday instructing federal agencies to consider additional 30-day comment periods for rules that have been finalized but not yet taken effect. Hemp falls into that category; the rules were published Tuesday but don’t take effect until March.



Source link

Posted on

UPS Will End Home Delivery of Vaping Products


Following congressional passage of the “vape mail” ban that will end U.S. Postal Service shipping of vaping products to consumers, UPS has joined Fedex in announcing it too will end shipping of vapes. The ban covers shipping to both consumers and businesses.

“Effective April 5, 2021, UPS will not transport vaping products to, from, or within the United States due to the increased complexity to ship those products,” a company spokesperson told Vaping360 by email. The policy, which will soon leave no major shipping service willing to deliver vaping products to homes, has left online vaping retailers scrambling to find a solution.

The announcement followed days of uncertainty, with some vaping businesses being told that their accounts would be closed, and others being reassured that the company’s tobacco and vapor product policy would not change. (The UPS website has still not amended the policy.)

Fedex had already confirmed that it will end vapor product shipping as of March 1. DHL, the other major shipping service, previously banned domestic retail shipments of e-cigarettes and all nicotine-containing products.

The new law, which was inserted into the federal Omnibus Spending Bill, mandates that the U.S. Postal Service create regulations within 120 days banning U.S. Mail delivery of vaping products—whether they contain nicotine or not. The bill was so broad that the wording includes all vaping products, including all cannabis, CBD, and flavor-only liquids and devices.

The Postal Service has not issued its new rules yet. Existing USPS regulations allow manufacturers, distributors and retailers to ship cigarettes and smokeless tobacco to each other, but not directly to customers. If those rules carry over to vaping products, vape shops will still be able to receive products, but individual customers will be unable to receive deliveries at home.

In addition to banning USPS deliveries of vaping products, the “Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act” forces vape product sellers into the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act, which is part of the larger federal Jenkins Act. The PACT Act imposes a series of stringent requirements on shippers of included products:

  • Register with the U.S. Attorney General/ATF
  • Verify age of customers using a commercially available database
  • Use private shipping services that collect an adult signature at the point of delivery
  • If selling in states that tax vaping products, sellers must register with the federal government and with the tobacco tax administrators of the states
  • Collect all applicable local and state taxes, and affix any required tax stamps to the products sold
  • Send each taxing state’s tax administrator a list of all transactions with customers in their state, including the names and addresses of each customer sold to, and the quantities and type of each product sold
  • Maintain records for five years of any “delivery interrupted because the carrier or service determines or has reason to believe that the person ordering the delivery is in violation of the [PACT Act]”

Sellers who do not register or don’t comply with the requirements of the PACT Act are subject to severe penalties, including prison. The PACT Act provisions of the law take effect in late March, and apply to all online sales, no matter which carrier ships them.

You can read our previous coverage of the “Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act” here:



Source link