Chemical analysis of fresh and aged Australian e‐cigarette liquids

Larcombe, Alexander; Allard, Sebastien; Mullins, Benjamin

doi:10.5694/mja2.51461

Topics

In reply: We thank Morgan and colleagues1 for their interest in our recent publication2 and the robust discussion it has generated. We would like to respond with some clarifying information.

1 Telethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA
2 Curtin University, Perth, WA
3 Curtin Water Quality Research Centre, Curtin University, Perth, WA

Correspondence: alexander.larcombe@telethonkids.org.au

Acknowledgements:

The original study for which this response is targeted was funded by Minderoo Foundation, Lung Foundation Australia, Cancer Council WA and the Scottish Masonic Charitable Foundation. The funders played no part in the study.

Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.

1. Morgan J, Jones A, Kelso C. Chemical analysis of fresh and aged Australian e‐cigarette liquids [letter]. Med J Aust 2022; 216: 373.
2. Larcombe A, Allard S, Pringle P, et al. Chemical analysis of fresh and aged Australian e‐cigarette liquids. Med J Aust 2022; 216: 27‐32. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2022/216/1/chemical‐analysis‐fresh‐and‐aged‐australian‐e‐cigarette‐liquids
3. Sigma–Aldrich chemical safety data sheets. https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/AU/en/search (viewed Nov 2021).
4. Soulet S, Duquesne M, Toutain J, et al. Impact of vaping regimens on electronic cigarette efficiency. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16: 4753.

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.