Variations in cigarette brand characteristics: can consumers tell the difference?

OBJECTIVES: Sensory experience is an important determinant of smoking initiation, brand choice and harm perception, but little is known about how cigarette design shapes sensory experience. This study reports which variations in tobacco blend and design characteristics available on the market are likely to be perceived as different by consumers. METHODS: Truth Tobacco Industry Documents was reviewed for studies showing noticeable sensory differences resulting from variations in tobacco blend and design characteristics. These differences were compared with tobacco product data as available in the Dutch section of the European Common Entry Gate (EU-CEG) system on 30 April 2020. RESULTS: Industry documents identified discrimination thresholds for ventilation, pressure drop, tobacco weight, filter length, and tar and nicotine levels in smoke while evidence for other design characteristics was less conclusive. In the 103 different cigarette varieties in the EU-CEG database, five main types of cigarettes could be identified by principal component analysis, differing in (combinations of) design characteristics. The most significant differences between brand varieties were tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide emissions and associated parameters filter ventilation, filter length, cigarette length and tobacco weight. CONCLUSIONS: While some clusters of brand varieties provided a noticeably different product for consumers, in many cases design differences within these clusters did not exceed the expected discrimination threshold. This indicates that many products on the market are not discernibly different for consumers, and that proliferation of brand varieties has a non-sensory purpose, such as marketing. Policy makers should consider limiting available brand varieties and regulating design characteristics to reduce product appeal.

Regulatory Approaches and Implementation of Minimally Addictive Combusted Products.

INTRODUCTION: A joint meeting was held by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Convention Secretariat of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to examine the potential effects of a regulatory policy to reduce nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels. This paper reviews the feasibility of and approaches to implementing a nicotine product standard. METHODS: Prior WHO reports on this topic were consulted and a systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted. The paper was reviewed by the participants at the aforementioned meeting and their feedback was incorporated. RESULTS: The nicotine dose most likely to consistently reduce smoking behavior and dependence is ≤0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco. An immediate rather than a gradual nicotine reduction approach appears to be more beneficial. Smokers are likely to seek nicotine from alternate sources (e.g., nicotine replacement therapies, e-cigarettes) or potentially, the illegal market. As such, the availability of alternative products, as well as strong policies against illegal markets, can potentially mitigate unintended consequences. An effectively reduced nicotine regulation must be imbedded in a comprehensive and strong tobacco control program that includes public education and surveillance. Barriers and challenges to implementing a nicotine product standard exist, particularly in low-capacity countries. CONCLUSIONS: Not all countries will have the capacity to implement a regulation to reduce nicotine in cigarettes (and preferably other combusted tobacco products) to minimally addictive levels. However, for the countries that choose to implement it, such a policy could potentially dramatically reduce the burden of tobacco use. IMPLICATIONS FOR TOBACCO REGULATORY SCIENCE: Article 9 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control provides signatory governments the authority to implement a product standard for reducing nicotine in tobacco products to minimally addictive levels. This product standard has the potential to result in a dramatic reduction in cigarette and other combusted tobacco use and therefore, smoking-caused mortality and morbidity. This article describes the growing scientific evidence to support nicotine regulation in cigarettes, potential regulatory approaches and describes the infrastructure and tobacco control policies needed to implement a reduced nicotine product standard.

Industry research on the use and effects of levulinic acid: a case study in cigarette additives.

Public health officials and tobacco researchers have raised concerns about the possible contributions of additives to the toxicity of cigarettes. However, little attention has been given to the process whereby additives promote initiation and addiction. Levulinic acid is a known cigarette additive. Review of internal tobacco industry documents indicates that levulinic acid was used to increase nicotine yields while enhancing perceptions of smoothness and mildness. Levulinic acid reduces the pH of cigarette smoke and desensitizes the upper respiratory tract, increasing the potential for cigarette smoke to be inhaled deeper into the lungs. Levulinic acid also may enhance the binding of nicotine to neurons that ordinarily would be unresponsive to nicotine. These findings held particular interest in the internal development of ultralight and so-called reduced-exposure cigarette prototypes. Industry studies found significantly increased peak plasma nicotine levels in smokers of ultralight cigarettes following addition of levulinic acid. Further, internal studies observed changes in mainstream and sidestream smoke composition that may present increased health risks. The use of levulinic acid illustrates the need for regulatory authority over tobacco products as well as better understanding of the role of additives in cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Application, function, and effects of menthol in cigarettes: a survey of tobacco industry documents.

Menthol cigarettes are the only cigarette market category identified by use of a flavor additive and constitute more than a quarter of the overall market. Menthol also is used at reduced levels in many nonmenthol brands. Public health research has suggested patterns of use of mentholated brands as a potential explanation for the health disparities between Black (largely menthol) and White (largely nonmenthol) smokers and has explored the effects of menthol on smoker behavior, consumption patterns, and consequent delivery of smoke constituents. However, relatively few published studies have directly examined the physiological impact and function of menthol delivery in cigarettes. In this study, we review internal tobacco industry documents to assess industry research on function and effects of menthol in cigarettes. Industry documents describe a range of physiological effects of menthol, with important implications for use and consumption patterns. These effects include altered perception of tobacco smoke and its constituents via cooling, smoothing, and anesthetic effects; increased impact through stimulation of trigeminal receptors; interaction with nicotine controlling its perception, delivery, and uptake; and increased respiratory irritation and toxic effects. Further studies are needed to evaluate these findings. We conclude that the unique differences between menthol cigarettes and nonmenthol cigarettes must be considered in research, cessation treatment, and enactment of tobacco product regulations.