Div of Environmental Health Laboratory Sciences, and Div of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects, National Center for Environmental Health; Div of Field Epidemiology, Epidemiology Program Office; Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC. Rockville, vapingnear Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and vapingnear Health, 1989:21; DHHS publication no.
(CDC)89-8411. Use of commerce names and industrial sources is for vapingnear identification solely and doesn’t indicate endorsement by the general public Health Service or the U.S. This report summarizes CDC’s ongoing investigation, vapingthink which suggests that prolonged cigarette smoking prompted a lot of the health complaints; in addition, the investigation has not identified a distinguishing chemical characteristic of the recalled cigarettes.
During June 6-8, 1995, public well being officials in Minnesota, Oregon, and Texas requested CDC’s help in investigating shopper well being complaints associated with smoking Philip Morris cigarettes near the time of the recall.
Though Philip Morris reportedly recalled cigarettes partly because of the latest detection of MITC, the laboratory analyses in this report point out that MITC was current in cigarettes manufactured by Philip Morris as much as 1 12 months before the recall and in cigarettes from different manufacturers.
Cigarettes included within the recall had been manufactured during May 13-22. Philip Morris U.S.A. Second, the recalled cigarettes offered by Philip Morris may not be representative of all of the cigarettes eligible for recall. CDC with samples of recalled cigarettes (manufactured on May 19, 1995) and, for comparative analyses, supplied samples of cigarettes manufactured earlier than (on March 3, vaporover (vaporover.com) 1995) and after (on June 12, 1995) the recall. CDC used a standardized type to interview individuals who reported sickness and, vapingstand when possible, collected cigarette samples.
Reports of instances of sickness near the time of the recall had been recognized by means of passive surveillance by direct telephone calls to CDC. A total of 41 (57%) individuals reported onsets of sickness earlier than the recall, and vapeamong 31 (43%) reported onsets after the recall. Of the eight compounds, three (butyric acid; 1,2-propanediol diacetate; and 2-ethylhexyl acetate) had been detected in prerecall, recall, and postrecall cigarettes; the opposite five compounds were not detected.
Analysis of volatile natural compounds from the filter and from the tobacco and paper of those cigarettes did not establish such a profile. Compared with prerecall and postrecall cigarettes, there was no distinctive increase in a number of of those compounds within the recall cigarettes.
