Ethyl Acetate in E-Liquids: Implications for Forensic Breath Testing

New research identifies unlabeled ethyl acetate in common e-liquids, revealing its potential to convert to ethanol in vivo and cause false positive breath alcohol test results, raising critical concerns for forensic toxicology and workplace drug testing.

9 Min Read
A scientific graphic illustrating an e-cigarette and a breathalyzer alongside the chemical structures of ethyl acetate and ethanol, highlighting the potential for false-positive breathalyzer results.

The global rise of electronic cigarette (e-cig) use has brought with it a complex array of chemicals in e-liquids, designed for flavor, smell, and various effects. While regulations from bodies like the FDA attempt to control this market, many products remain widely available without proper oversight or accurate labeling. A significant concern in forensic toxicology is the presence of substances that can interfere with standard drug and alcohol testing. A recent study, published in the Journal of Analytical Toxicology, highlights a critical issue: the detection of ethyl acetate in e-liquids and its direct implications for breath ethanol testing. This research underscores a major challenge for forensic toxicology, particularly in workplace and legal contexts.

E-Liquids: A Regulatory Minefield

Electronic cigarettes have exploded in popularity worldwide, with their liquid formulations, or e-liquids, containing a diverse mix of chemicals. While many ingredients are deemed “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) by the FDA, this designation often applies only to oral consumption, not inhalation. Despite regulatory efforts, including flavor bans and expanding control to synthetic nicotine, many unauthorized products still flood the market, often with inaccurate or incomplete labeling. This lack of quality assurance and transparency creates significant challenges for public health and, as this study shows, for forensic toxicology. Common e-liquid carriers include propylene glycol (PG) and vegetable glycerin (VG), but other unlisted chemicals, including solvents like ethanol, have frequently been found, raising concerns about their impact on various drug and alcohol tests.

The Problem with Ethyl Acetate in E-Liquids

Among the many undocumented chemicals identified in e-liquids, ethyl acetate stands out as a pervasive and problematic component.

What is Ethyl Acetate?

Ethyl acetate is an ester widely used industrially as a solvent, and also found as a food additive and flavoring agent. However, despite its GRAS status for food, its inhalation is known to cause toxicity, damaging lung and mucosal tissue, and leading to symptoms like headaches, dizziness, and respiratory irritation. Previous studies have shown it present in up to 95% of analyzed e-liquid samples, often at concentrations exceeding occupational safety limits.

Metabolism and Ethanol Production

The critical forensic concern with ethyl acetate is its rapid metabolism in the body. Animal studies have demonstrated that when inhaled, ethyl acetate is quickly hydrolyzed to ethanol in vivo (within 5-10 minutes). High concentrations of inhaled ethyl acetate can lead to significant accumulation of ethanol in the blood, reaching levels that could indicate impairment. A fatal case of ethyl acetate intoxication even showed higher ethanol concentrations in lung tissue than other parts of the body, highlighting the immediate local conversion. This rapid conversion is primarily facilitated by carboxylesterases present in nasal and respiratory tissues.

Case Study: Vaping and Breath Alcohol Detection

This research was prompted by a real-world scenario: a workplace drug test that yielded a positive breath alcohol result for an employee using an e-liquid.

Methodology: Identifying Ethyl Acetate

The study analyzed a “Heisenberg” e-liquid that an employee in a safety-sensitive position reported using just before a random drug test. This test resulted in a breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) of 0.019%. The laboratory then obtained additional identical e-liquids from different lots for comparative analysis.

Using Headspace Gas Chromatography–Flame Ionization Detection coupled with Mass Spectrometry (HS-GC–FID–MS), researchers identified and quantified chemicals within the e-liquids. This sophisticated analytical technique allowed for precise detection of volatile compounds.

Key Findings: Quantifying the Risk

The analysis revealed compelling results:

  • Unlabeled Ethyl Acetate: The “Heisenberg” e-liquid, despite being labeled “0 mg nicotine” and not listing ethanol, contained a significant amount of ethyl acetate (the case sample contained 1,488 ± 6 mg/L, with other samples ranging from 1,407 to 1,977 mg/L).
  • Ethanol Conversion: The presence of ethyl acetate, which rapidly converts to ethanol in vivo, strongly suggests a mechanism by which an individual could produce a positive breath alcohol test result after vaping such an e-liquid.
  • Immediate Localized Production: Unlike oral consumption, the inhalation of ethyl acetate directly into the lungs means ethanol can be produced almost immediately in the exhaled breath, potentially before systemic absorption and equilibration.
  • Interference with Breath Tests: The study cited previous research indicating that even low concentrations of ethyl acetate could influence ethanol readings on breath analyzers without necessarily triggering an “interfering compound” alert.

Expert Commentary: Navigating the Challenges for Forensic Toxicology

This study sheds light on a critical, often overlooked, aspect of forensic toxicology and workplace drug testing: the potential for commonly used e-liquid components to interfere with breath alcohol tests. As someone working in forensic analysis, this research highlights the complexity of interpreting seemingly straightforward results, especially in the context of emerging substances.

Implications for Breath Alcohol Testing

The findings are highly significant for anyone relying on breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) measurements, from roadside impairment investigations to workplace drug screenings and court-mandated testing. A positive BrAC, even a low one like 0.019%, can have serious professional and legal consequences for an individual. This research provides a crucial “affirmative defense” for individuals who may unintentionally produce a positive result due to the metabolism of unlabeled ethyl acetate from vaping. It underscores the importance of thorough investigation beyond just the initial breath test reading, especially when an individual denies alcohol consumption.

The Unlabeled Ingredient Problem

The recurring issue of unlabeled or mislabeled ingredients in e-liquids is a major regulatory and public health concern. The fact that a product advertised as “0 mg nicotine” could contain undeclared ethyl acetate, a substance with known toxicological effects and the ability to convert into ethanol, speaks volumes about the current state of e-cigarette regulation. This lack of transparency places an undue burden on forensic laboratories and individuals, who are left to contend with the unforeseen chemical interactions.

My Perspective: A Call for Greater Scrutiny

This research is a stark reminder that the landscape of substances impacting forensic analyses is constantly evolving. In a field like forensic toxicology, where the stakes are incredibly high, we must remain vigilant about emerging trends in consumer products. The challenges presented by e-liquids are similar to those we face with new synthetic drugs or complex trace evidence. It calls for continuous research, rigorous method validation, and an informed approach to interpreting results. This study is a vital contribution to that ongoing effort to refine our understanding of common substances that can create ambiguity in standard tests.


Conclusion

The identification of unlabeled ethyl acetate in e-liquids poses a significant new challenge for forensic breath testing. This groundbreaking research demonstrates that the in vivo conversion of inhaled ethyl acetate to ethanol can indeed lead to detectable breath alcohol concentrations, potentially impacting workplace drug tests and legal proceedings. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved regulatory oversight of e-liquid composition and underscore the importance of comprehensive toxicological investigations to avoid misinterpretations in breath ethanol analysis.


Original Research Paper

Holt, A. K., Veeser, A. M., Poklis, J. L., & Peace, M. R. (2024). Ethyl acetate in e-liquids: Implications for breath testing. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, 48(6), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bkae044

What are your thoughts on the regulatory implications of unlabeled chemicals in e-liquids, especially concerning forensic testing? Share your insights in the comments below!

Share This Article
Follow:
Forensic Analyst by Profession. With Simplyforensic.com striving to provide a one-stop-all-in-one platform with accessible, reliable, and media-rich content related to forensic science. Education background in B.Sc.Biotechnology and Master of Science in forensic science.
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Exit mobile version