Prue Talbot

Dr. Prue Talbot

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

23Years (2004-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
20 March 2013 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MWMonique Williams
Monique Williams
AVAmanda Villarreal
Amanda Villarreal
KBKrassimir Bozhilov
Krassimir Bozhilov
SLSabrina Lin
Sabrina Lin
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot
Electronic cigarettes (EC) deliver aerosol by heating fluid containing nicotine. Cartomizer EC combine the fluid chamber and heating element in a single unit. Because EC do not burn tobacco, they may be safer than conventional cigarettes. Their use is rapidly increasing worldwide with little prior testing of their aerosol. We tested the hypothesis that EC aerosol contains metals derived from various components in EC. Cartomizer contents and aerosols were analyzed using light and electron microscopy, cytotoxicity testing, x-ray microanalysis, particle counting, and inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry. The filament, a nickel-chromium wire, was coupled to a thicker copper wire coated with silver. The silver coating was sometimes missing. Four tin solder joints attached the wires to each other and coupled the copper/silver wire to the air tube and mouthpiece. All cartomizers had evidence of use before packaging (burn spots on the fibers and electrophoretic movement of fluid in the fibers). Fibers in two cartomizers had green deposits that contained copper. Centrifugation of the fibers produced large pellets containing tin. Tin particles and tin whiskers were identified in cartridge fluid and outer fibers. Cartomizer fluid with tin particles was cytotoxic in assays using human pulmonary fibroblasts. The aerosol contained particles >1 µm comprised of tin, silver, iron, nickel, aluminum, and silicate and nanoparticles (<100 nm) of tin, chromium and nickel. The concentrations of nine of eleven elements in EC aerosol were higher than or equal to the corresponding concentrations in conventional cigarette smoke. Many of the elements identified in EC aerosol are known to cause respiratory distress and disease. The presence of metal and silicate particles in cartomizer aerosol demonstrates the need for improved quality control in EC design and manufacture and studies on how EC aerosol impacts the health of users and bystanders.

9 February 2015 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRachel Z Behar
Rachel Z Behar
MHMy Hua
My Hua
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot
Prior electronic cigarette (EC) topography data are based on two video analyses with limited parameters. Alternate methods for measuring topography are needed to understand EC use and nicotine intake. This study evaluated EC topography with a CReSS Pocket device and quantified nicotine intake. Validation tests on pressure drop, flow rate, and volume confirmed reliable performance of the CReSS Pocket device. Twenty participants used Blu Cigs and V2 Cigs for 10 minute intervals with a 10–15 minute break between brands. Brand order was reversed and repeated within 7 days Data were analyzed to determine puff duration, puff count, volume, flow rate, peak flow, and inter-puff interval. Nicotine intake was estimated from cartomizer fluid consumption and topography data. Nine patterns of EC use were identified. The average puff count and inter-puff interval were 32 puffs and 17.9 seconds. All participants, except one, took more than 20 puffs/10 minutes. The averages for puff duration (2.65 seconds/puff), volume/puff (51ml/puff), total puff volume (1,579 ml), EC fluid consumption (79.6 mg), flow rate (20 ml/s), and peak flow rate (27 ml/s) were determined for 10-minute sessions. All parameters except total puff count were significantly different for Blu versus V2 EC. Total volume for Blu versus V2 was four-times higher than for conventional cigarettes. Average nicotine intake for Blu and V2 across both sessions was 1.2 ± 0.5 mg and 1.4 ± 0.7 mg, respectively, which is similar to conventional smokers. EC puffing topography was variable among participants in the study, but often similar within an individual between brands or days. Puff duration, inter-puff interval, and puff volume varied from conventional cigarette standards. Data on total puff volume and nicotine intake are consistent with compensatory usage of EC. These data can contribute to the development of a standard protocol for laboratory testing of EC products.

21 March 2019 in Chemical Research in Toxicology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EOEsther E. Omaiye
Esther E. Omaiye
KMKevin J. McWhirter
Kevin J. McWhirter
WLWentai Luo
Wentai Luo
JPJames F. Pankow
James F. Pankow
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot

8 April 2013 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MHMy Hua
My Hua
MAMina Alfi
Mina Alfi
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot
Health-Related Effects Reported by Electronic Cigarette Users in Online Forums

21 February 2019 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EOEsther E. Omaiye
Esther E. Omaiye
KMKevin J. McWhirter
Kevin J. McWhirter
WLWentai Luo
Wentai Luo
PTPeyton A. Tierney
Peyton A. Tierney
JPJames F. Pankow
James F. Pankow
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot
We characterized the flavor chemicals in a broad sample of commercially available electronic cigarette (EC) refill fluids that were purchased in four different countries. Flavor chemicals in 277 refill fluids were identified and quantified by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry, and two commonly used flavor chemicals were tested for cytotoxicity with the MTT assay using human lung fibroblasts and epithelial cells. About 85% of the refill fluids had total flavor concentrations >1 mg/ml, and 37% were >10 mg/ml (1% by weight). Of the 155 flavor chemicals identified in the 277 refill fluids, 50 were present at ≥1 mg/ml in at least one sample and 11 were ≥10 mg/ml in 54 of the refill fluids. Sixty-one% (170 out of 277) of the samples contained nicotine, and of these, 56% had a total flavor chemical/nicotine ratio >2. Four chemicals were present in 50% (menthol, triacetin, and cinnamaldehyde) to 80% (ethyl maltol) of the samples. Some products had concentrations of menthol (“Menthol Arctic”) and ethyl maltol (“No. 64”) that were 30 times (menthol) and 100 times (ethyl maltol) their cytotoxic concentration. One refill fluid contained cinnamaldehyde at ~34% (343 mg/ml), more than 100,000 times its cytotoxic level. High concentrations of some flavor chemicals in EC refill fluids are potentially harmful to users, and continued absence of any regulations regarding flavor chemicals in EC fluids will likely be detrimental to human health.

29 May 2018 in Scientific Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRachel Z. Behar
Rachel Z. Behar
WLWentai Luo
Wentai Luo
KMKevin J. McWhirter
Kevin J. McWhirter
JPJames F. Pankow
James F. Pankow
PTPrue Talbot
Prue Talbot
Thousands of electronic cigarette refill fluids are commercially available. The concentrations of nicotine and the solvents, but not the flavor chemicals, are often disclosed on product labels. The purpose of this study was to identify and quantify flavor chemicals in 39 commercial refill fluids that were previously evaluated for toxicity. Twelve flavor chemicals were identified with concentrations ≥1 mg/ml: cinnamaldehyde, menthol, benzyl alcohol, vanillin, eugenol, p-anisaldehyde, ethyl cinnamate, maltol, ethyl maltol, triacetin, benzaldehyde, and menthone. Transfer of these flavor chemicals into aerosols made at 3V and 5V was efficient (mean transfer = 98%). We produced lab-made refill fluids containing authentic standards of each flavor chemical and analyzed the toxicity of their aerosols produced at 3V and 5V using a tank Box Mod device. Over 50% of the refill fluids in our sample contained high concentrations of flavor chemicals that transferred efficiently to aerosols at concentrations that produce cytotoxicity. When tested with two types of human lung cells, the aerosols made at 5V were generally more toxic than those made at 3V. These data will be valuable for consumers, physicians, public health officials, and regulatory agencies when discussing potential health concerns relating to flavor chemicals in electronic cigarette products.