Appointments at Mayo Clinic Mayo Clinic offers appointments in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota and at Mayo Clinic Health System locations. I'm thinking about buying an air purifier. Do any of them work on cigarette smoke? If you're considering buying an air purifier, you have choices. But if you want an air purifier that will eliminate cigarette smoke, you're out of luck. Tobacco smoke is made up of gaseous pollutants and particulate matter. Most air purifiers, also called air cleaners, are not designed to remove gaseous pollutants. Mechanical air filters, such as high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, and electronic air cleaners, such as ionizers, target particles. While the use of air cleaning devices can help reduce levels of smaller airborne particles, research suggests that the devices aren't 100 percent effective. Air cleaners also might not decrease harmful health effects caused by indoor pollutants such as cigarette smoke. Other air cleaners generate ozone, which is a lung irritant.

At levels that don't exceed public health standards, ozone has little ability to remove air contaminants such as cigarette smoke. The best way to protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke is to not allow smoking in your home. If you smoke, this is another good reason to stop. J. Taylor Hays, M.D. Guide to air cleaners in the home. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed Oct. 23, 2015. Butz AM, et al. A randomized trial of air cleaners and a health coach to improve indoor air quality for inner-city children with asthma and secondhand smoke exposure. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. Secondhand tobacco smoke and smoke-free homes. Ventilation does not effectively protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed Oct. 26, 2015. See more Expert Answers Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission. Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic.

The Essential Diabetes BookThe Menopause Solution — NEW!Guide to Stress-Free LivingMayo Clinic on Healthy AgingThe Mayo Clinic Diet Online Other Topics in Patient Care & Health Info Diseases and Conditions A-Z Tests and Procedures A-Z Drugs and Supplements A-Z Patient and Visitor GuideArch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011 Aug;165(8):741-8. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.111.Butz AM1, Matsui EC, Breysse P, Curtin-Brosnan J, Eggleston P, Diette G, Williams D, Yuan J, Bernert JT, Rand C.Author information1Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 200 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. abutz@jhmi.eduAbstractOBJECTIVE: To test an air cleaner and health coach intervention to reduce secondhand smoke exposure compared with air cleaners alone or no air cleaners in reducing particulate matter (PM), air nicotine, and urine cotinine concentrations and increasing symptom-free days in children with asthma residing with a smoker.

DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial, with randomization embedded in study database.best air purifier singapore hazeSETTINGS: The Johns Hopkins Hospital Children's Center and homes of children.cd lens cleaner kopenPARTICIPANTS: Children with asthma, residing with a smoker, randomly assigned to interventions consisting of air cleaners only (n = 41), air cleaners plus a health coach (n = 41), or delayed air cleaner (control) (n = 44).air duct cleaning services scarboroughMAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in PM, air nicotine, and urine cotinine concentrations and symptom-free days during the 6-month study.RESULTS: The overall follow-up rate was high (91.3%). Changes in mean fine and coarse PM (PM(2.5) and PM(2.5-10)) concentrations (baseline to 6 months) were significantly lower in both air cleaner groups compared with the control group (mean differences for PM(2.5) concentrations: control, 3.5 μg/m(3); air cleaner only, -19.9 μg/m(3); and air cleaner plus health coach, -16.1 μg/m(3);

and PM(2.5-10) concentrations: control, 2.4 μg/m(3); air cleaner only, -8.7 μg/m(3); and air cleaner plus health coach, -10.6 μg/m(3); No differences were noted in air nicotine or urine cotinine concentrations. The health coach provided no additional reduction in PM concentrations. Symptom-free days were significantly increased [corrected] in both air cleaner groups compared with the control group (P = .03).CONCLUSION: Although the use of air cleaners can result in a significant reduction in indoor PM concentrations and a significant increase in symptom-free days, it is not enough to prevent exposure to secondhand smoke.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00466024.PMID: 21810636 DOI: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.111 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication TypesComparative StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.MeSH TermsAir Pollution, Indoor/analysisAir Pollution, Indoor/prevention & control*Asthma/epidemiology*Asthma/prevention & control*Chi-Square DistributionChildCotinine/urineFemaleFiltration/instrumentation*Health Education/methods*Housing*HumansLogistic ModelsMaleMaryland/epidemiologyNicotine/analysisParticle SizeStatistics, NonparametricTobacco Smoke Pollution/prevention & control*Urban PopulationVentilationSubstancesTobacco Smoke PollutionNicotineCotinineSecondary Source IDClinicalTrials.gov/NCT00466024Grant SupportE09606/PHS HHS/United StatesFull Text SourcesSilverchair Information SystemsOvid Technologies

, Inc.Other Literature SourcesCOS Scholar UniverseMedicalClinicalTrials.govAsthma - Genetic AllianceAsthma - MedlinePlus Health InformationAsthma in Children - MedlinePlus Health InformationIndoor Air Pollution - MedlinePlus Health InformationSecondhand Smoke - MedlinePlus Health InformationMiscellaneousNICOTINE - Hazardous Substances Data BankCotinine - Hazardous Substances Data BankFor the user, it’s obvious that vaping is a great alternative to smoking. Many of us, including myself, now prefer vaping to smoking entirely. I really enjoy all the different flavor options and being able to vape a single hit or two without dedicating 5-10 minutes to go have a cigarette. Now what about what you exhale when vaping? We already know what’s in the e-juice, but what exactly is coming out of our lungs into the air to potentially bother those around us? The most recent study I know of is conducted by clearstream working closely with utah vapers. The study has completed and is now in the process of full doctoral review so the summary is no longer published at that page.

The short version is that second hand vapor contains no harmful chemicals and no nicotine. Really the only possible irritants that I can think of are the trace amounts of flavor. Here is an excerpt of what used to be there: In December 2011, the Utah Vapers began working closely with FlavourArt from Milan Italy to research the current studies on electronic cigarettes. What we found is a lack of evidence to support the belief we all had in that there was no harm to bystanders in exhaled vapor (second-hand vapor). After months of coordination, Clearstream Air was announced to the world electronic cigarette community on 22 March 2012 – also known as World Vaping Day. Simply put, the Clearstream Air project is a comparative evaluation between tobacco and electronic cigarettes and hoped to draw a positive conclusion about the lack of harm with electronic cigarette usage. The study focused on the release of airborne contaminants in closed room environment to determine if there are any contaminants and if so, at what levels.

The following substances were measured for in the exhaled smoke and vapor. As the study has been completed and a professional doctoral review completed, I’m proud to announce that the results are better than we could have anticipated. In short, there is NO harm found in exhaled vapor from electronic cigarettes. The most exciting results I found is that testing did not detect any nicotine in the exhaled vapor. Now, you may ask why I find this exciting. Well, my excitement is on two levels. 1) This means that the human lung absorbs most if not all of the nicotine which has long been questioned within the global electronic cigarette community; and 2) This also means no nicotine was detected in the ‘second-hand vapor’. All other substances measured for electronic cigarettes were FAR below allowable levels for human inhalation according to the FDA. In fact, the levels were so low that it proves it is more hazardous to your health to breath the air in any major downtown metropolitan city during heightened times of driving.