Cited by 146Smoking Behavior and CessationPharmaceutical Quality and CounterfeitingForensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis

Nicotine levels in electronic cigarette refill solutions: A comparative analysis of products from the US, Korea, and Poland

Open access
Goniewicz, Maciej L., Gupta, Ribhav, Lee, Yong Hee, Reinhardt, Skyler, Kim, Sungroul, Kim, Bokyeong, Kosmider, Leon, Sobczak, Andrzej·2015·International Journal of Drug Policy

Abstract

Background Electronic cigarettes vaporize nicotine dissolved in glycerine and/or propylene glycol (e-liquid). Due to a lack of regulations, e-liquids may contain inaccurately labelled nicotine levels. Our aim was to test nicotine levels in samples of e-liquids from three countries.Methods We measured nicotine concentration in 32, 29 and 30 e-liquids purchased between 2013 and 2014 from locations in the United States (US), South Korea, and Poland, respectively.Results Nicotine concentration in the US products varied from 0 to 36.6 mg/mL. Traces of nicotine were found in three US products labelled as 'nicotine free'. Two-thirds of South Korean products did not contain detectable amounts of nicotine, whereas nicotine concentration in other products varied from 6.4±0.7 to 150.3±7.9 (labelled as 'pure nicotine') mg/mL. In products from Poland, nicotine concentration varied from 0 to 24.7±0.1 mg/mL. Overall, we found significant discrepancies (>20%) in the labelled nicotine concentrations in 19% of analysed e-liquids.Conclusion Most of the analysed samples had no significant discrepancies in labelled nicotine concentrations and contained low nicotine levels. However some products labelled as 'nicotine-free' had detectable levels of the substance, suggesting insufficient manufacturing quality control. We identified a single product labelled as 'pure nicotine' which contained significantly higher concentration of the drug, increasing the risk of accidental poisoning. The study reveals the need for quality standards of these new nicotine containing products.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.01.020

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • E-cigarettes are marketed as a less harmful alternative to cigarettes and as a smoking cessation aid for nonpregnant smokers.

    “these products are marketed as a less harmful alternative to cigarettes and a smoking cessation aid for nonpregnant smokers.6”

    From Adverse Birth Outcomes Associated With Prepregnancy and Prenatal Electronic Cigarette Use (2021) · cites this paper as [6]

    The Introduction (page not provided) says e-cigarettes were marketed in South Korea as an alternative to conventional cigarettes. It does not say they were marketed as less harmful or as a smoking-cessation aid, or specify nonpregnant smokers. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [17]International Conference on Harmonization 2005 Topic Q2 (R1): Validation of analytical procedures: Text and Methodology Technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use Geneva, Switzerland International Conference on Harmonization Retrieved 15th November 2014 from http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Quality/Q2_R1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goniewicz, M. L., Gupta, R., Lee, Y. H., Reinhardt, S., Kim, S., Kim, B., Kosmider, L., & Sobczak, A.
Affiliations
  • Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
  • Soonchunhyang University (KR)
  • Institute of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health (PL)
Corresponding author
Goniewicz, Maciej L.
Venue
International Journal of Drug Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-06
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
583-588
ISSN
0955-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2101535259
Cited by
146
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7
FWCI
13.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Drug Policy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pharmaceutical Quality and Counterfeiting
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Keywords
electronic cigarettes, e-liquids, nicotine content, nicotine poisoning, product quality control, regulatory standards, cross-national comparison
MeSH terms
Humans, Nicotine, Poland, Solutions, United States, Republic of Korea, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review