The 13th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health

Objective:

To evaluate the physical characteristics and cigarette design features that distinguish cigarettes labeled with different descriptors denoting ‘strengths' or ‘flavors.'

Methods:

The major varieties of popular brand families in four countries (U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia) were examined using digital dilution/pressure drop equipment. Physical characteristics were examined using digital analytical balances to obtain weights, and digital calipers to assess length and diameter. Derived measures included filter and tobacco rod density. Tar and nicotine yield information were obtained from cigarette packs, manufacturers' websites, and government reports.

Results:

To date we have examined 96 varieties of cigarettes including 17 U.S. brand families and 13 Canadian brand families. Filter ventilation was highly correlated with ISO/FTC tar yields in both the US (r=-.89) and Canada (r=-.98). Filter ventilation was also highly correlated with machine measured tar yields generated using the more intense Canadian smoking machine protocol (r=-.74) where filter vents are completely blocked. Among U.S. brands, half of the brands self-described as “Full Flavor” would quality as “low tar” by the often cited arbitrary categorization of <15 mg tar by FTC method. In Canada, no varieties were higher than 15mg ISO tar, and so all would be considered low tar by this arbitrary definition. Stepwise discriminant analysis revealed that for US brands filter ventilation, tobacco density, and pressure drop best classified cigarettes by machine generated tar level (i.e., >15mg, 7-15mg, or <=mg tar). Among Canadian brands, length of the filter overwrap and filter ventilation best classified cigarettes based on ISO tar level.