Priority 10 from the Electronic Cigarettes PSP

UNCERTAINTY: What effect does second hand vape have on adults (including pregnant women), children and animals, and how does this compare to second hand smoke? (JLA PSP Priority 10)
Overall ranking 10
JLA question ID 0087/10
Explanatory note  Not available for this PSP

More corroborating evidence would be helpful. Farsalinos, Konstantinos E., and Gene Gillman. "Carbonyl emissions in e-cigarette aerosol: a systematic review and methodological considerations." Frontiers in physiology 8 (2018): 1119. (emissions substantially lower than cigarettes. Unable to compare studies. Didn't look at effect on health, just emissions.). Hess, I. M., Kishen Lachireddy, and Adam Capon. "A systematic review of the health risks from passive exposure to electronic cigarette vapour." Public Health Res Pract 26.2 (2016): e2621617. (No meta analysis. 16 studies. EC vapour has the potential to lead to adverse health effects. The risk from being passively exposed to EC vapour is likely to be less than the risk from passive exposure to conventional cigarette smoke).
Health risks from passive vape not been extensively researched. more studies needed.

Health Research Classification System category  Generic health relevance
Extra information provided by this PSP
Original uncertainty examples Is there ‘second hand smoke’ type implications from being around people who vape? ~ Are they safe to use around babies/children?.  ~ I would also like to see some research on the effect on household pets of people who vape in their homes, as I have read that PG can be harmful to cats and dogs.
Submitted by  25 x Healthcare Professionals ~ 60 x Patients
PSP information
PSP unique ID 0087
PSP name Electronic Cigarettes
Total number of uncertainties identified by this PSP. 52 (To see a full list of all uncertainties identified, please see the detailed spreadsheet held on the JLA website)
Date of priority setting workshop 20 September 2019