Analytic modeling and risk assessment of aerial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus through vaping expirations in shared micro-environments.

It is well known that airborne transmission of COVID-19 in indoor spaces occurs through various respiratory activities: breathing, vocalizing, coughing, and sneezing. However, there is a complete lack of knowledge of its possible transmission through exhalations of e-cigarette aerosol (ECA), which is also a respiratory activity. E-cigarettes have become widely popular among smokers seeking a much safer way of nicotine consumption than smoking. Due to restrictive lockdown measures taken during the COVID-19 pandemic, many smokers and vapers (e-cigarette users) were confined to shared indoor spaces, making it necessary to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 virus aerial transmission through their exhalations. We summarize inferred knowledge of respiratory particles emission and transport through ECA, as well as a theoretical framework for explaining the visibility of exhaled ECA, which has safety implications and is absent in other respiratory activities (apart from smoking). We also summarize and briefly discuss the effects of new SARS-CoV-2 variants, vaccination rates, and environmental factors that may influence the spread of COVID-19. To estimate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 virus aerial transmission associated with vaping exhalations, we adapt a theoretical risk model that has been used to analyze the risks associated with other respiratory activities in shared indoor spaces. We consider home and restaurant scenarios, with natural and mechanical ventilation, with occupants wearing and not wearing face masks. We consider as "control case" or baseline risk scenario an indoor space (home and restaurant) where respiratory droplets and droplet nuclei are uniformly distributed and aerial contagion risk might originate exclusively from occupants exclusively rest breathing, assuming this to be the only (unavoidable) respiratory activity they all carry on. If an infected occupant uses an e-cigarette in a home or restaurant scenarios, bystanders not wearing face masks exposed to the resulting ECA expirations face a [Formula: see text] increase of risk of contagion with respect the control case. This relative added risk with respect to the control case becomes [Formula: see text] for high-intensity vaping, [Formula: see text], and over [Formula: see text] for speaking for various periods or coughing (all without vaping). Infectious emissions are significantly modified by mechanical ventilation, face mask usage, vaccination, and environmental factors, but given the lack of empiric evidence, we assume as a working hypothesis that all basic parameters of respiratory activities are equally (or roughly equally) affected by these factors. Hence, the relative risk percentages with respect to the control state should remain roughly the same under a wide range of varying conditions. By avoiding direct exposure to the visible exhaled vaping jet, wearers of commonly used face masks are well protected from respiratory droplets and droplet nuclei directly emitted by mask-less vapers. Compared to the control case of an already existing (unavoidable) risk from continuous breathing, vaping emissions in shared indoor spaces pose just a negligible additional risk of COVID-19 contagion. We consider that it is not necessary to take additional preventive measures beyond those already prescribed (1.5 m separation and wearing face masks) in order to protect bystanders from this contagion.

Modeling Aerial Transmission of Pathogens (Including the SARS-CoV-2 Virus) through Aerosol Emissions from E-Cigarettes

We examine the plausibility of aerial transmission of pathogens (including the SARS-CoV-2 virus) through respiratory droplets that might be carried by exhaled e-cigarette aerosol (ECA). Given the lack of empiric evidence on this phenomenon, we consider available evidence on cigarette smoking and respiratory droplet emission from mouth breathing through a mouthpiece as convenient proxies to infer the capacity of vaping to transport pathogens in respiratory droplets. Since both exhaled droplets and ECA droplets are within the Stokes regime, the ECA flow acts effectively as a visual tracer of the expiratory flow. To infer quantitatively the direct exposure distance, we consider a model that approximates exhaled ECA flow as an axially symmetric intermittent steady starting jet evolving into an unstable puff, an evolution that we corroborate by comparison with photographs and videos of actual vapers. On the grounds of all this theoretical modeling, we estimate for low-intensity vaping (practiced by 80–90% of vapers) the emission of 6–210 (median 39.9, median deviation 67.3) respiratory submicron droplets per puff and a horizontal distance spread of 1–2 m, with intense vaping possibly emitting up to 1000 droplets per puff in the submicron range with a distance spread over 2 m. The optical visibility of the ECA flow has important safety implications, as bystanders become instinctively aware of the scope and distance of possible direct contagion through the vaping jet.

Aerial Transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus through Environmental E-Cigarette Aerosols: Implications for Public Policies.

We discuss the implications of possible contagion of COVID-19 through e-cigarette aerosol (ECA) for prevention and mitigation strategies during the current pandemic. This is a relevant issue when millions of vapers (and smokers) must remain under indoor confinement and/or share public outdoor spaces with non-users. The fact that the respiratory flow associated with vaping is visible (as opposed to other respiratory activities) clearly delineates a safety distance of 1-2 m along the exhaled jet to prevent direct exposure. Vaping is a relatively infrequent and intermittent respiratory activity for which we infer a mean emission rate of 79.82 droplets per puff (6-200, standard deviation 74.66) comparable to mouth breathing, it adds into shared indoor spaces (home and restaurant scenarios) a 1% extra risk of indirect COVID-19 contagion with respect to a "control case" of existing unavoidable risk from continuous breathing. As a comparative reference, this added relative risk increases to 44-176% for speaking 6-24 min per hour and 260% for coughing every 2 min. Mechanical ventilation decreases absolute emission levels but keeps the same relative risks. As long as direct exposure to the visible exhaled jet is avoided, wearing of face masks effectively protects bystanders and keeps risk estimates very low. As a consequence, protection from possible COVID-19 contagion through vaping emissions does not require extra interventions besides the standard recommendations to the general population: keeping a social separation distance of 2 m and wearing of face masks.