<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>Methods based on the analyses of cigarette filters have been used to estimate ‘tar’ and nicotine yields to smokers. These methods rely on the measurement of filtration efficiencies (FEs). However FEs may be influenced by both cigarette design features e.g., type of filter and levels of filter ventilation, and human smoking behaviour factors such as puff flow-rates and cigarette butt lengths. Two filter analysis methods are considered in our study. One is based on the analysis of whole filters using average values of FEs obtained from a range of machine smoking regimes. The other, a ‘part filter’ method, analyses a 10 mm section from the mouth end of the filter where the FE remains relatively constant irrespective of puff flow rates and butt lengths. Human puffing behaviour records were obtained from 10 smokers, each smoking six commercial cigarettes ranging from 1 mg to 12 mg ‘tar’ yields [International Standard (ISO) values]. These records were used to drive a human smoke duplicator and the resulting ‘tar’ and nicotine yields obtained from duplication were compared with the estimates obtained from ‘whole’ and ‘part filter’ analysis. The results indicated that whilst both filter methods gave good correlations with nicotine and ‘tar’ yields obtained from smoke duplication, the ‘part filter’ method was less susceptible to the effect of nicotine condensation and changes in FEs and hence gave a more accurate assessment of yields than the ‘whole filter’ method.</p>
</abstract>

Methods based on the analyses of cigarette filters have been used to estimate ‘tar’ and nicotine yields to smokers. These methods rely on the measurement of filtration efficiencies (FEs). However FEs may be influenced by both cigarette design features e.g., type of filter and levels of filter ventilation, and human smoking behaviour factors such as puff flow-rates and cigarette butt lengths. Two filter analysis methods are considered in our study. One is based on the analysis of whole filters using average values of FEs obtained from a range of machine smoking regimes. The other, a ‘part filter’ method, analyses a 10 mm section from the mouth end of the filter where the FE remains relatively constant irrespective of puff flow rates and butt lengths. Human puffing behaviour records were obtained from 10 smokers, each smoking six commercial cigarettes ranging from 1 mg to 12 mg ‘tar’ yields [International Standard (ISO) values]. These records were used to drive a human smoke duplicator and the resulting ‘tar’ and nicotine yields obtained from duplication were compared with the estimates obtained from ‘whole’ and ‘part filter’ analysis. The results indicated that whilst both filter methods gave good correlations with nicotine and ‘tar’ yields obtained from smoke duplication, the ‘part filter’ method was less susceptible to the effect of nicotine condensation and changes in FEs and hence gave a more accurate assessment of yields than the ‘whole filter’ method.

Validation of Methods for Determining Consumer Smoked Cigarette Yields from Cigarette Filter Analysis

British American Tobacco, Southampton, SO15 8 TL, UK

Formerly with Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, Macon, GA 31202, USA

Currently consulting with British American Tobacco, 112 Raven Avenue, Perry, GA, 31069, USA

R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Winston-Salem, NC, 27102, USA

Formerly with British American Tobacco, London, WC2R 2PG, UK

Contributions to Tobacco & Nicotine Research

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Methods based on the analyses of cigarette filters have been used to estimate ‘tar’ and nicotine yields to smokers. These methods rely on the measurement of...

Validation of Methods for Determining Consumer Smoked Cigarette Yields from Cigarette Filter Analysis

Publicado en línea: 30 dic 2014

Páginas: 176 - 184

Recibido: 05 abr 2006

Aceptado: 27 jun 2006

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cttr-2013-0826

© 2006 Beiträge zur Tabakforschung International

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.