Tobacco Documents Online

---

LlllO0001

Dro V.B. rOl~7Oe0 RAD Dop~rtmont, HLxxbe~ko I~GF/SL'V/I. !. I o I I D~o D.O. FoXtoO. .,'vno,, s972 STRXCTLT C 0NFXDF~TZAL Your note st 8Oh Juno requested same ooaments by ne on MT, Bluott's pz~posals9 to vh£ch the obeys oodoonmme has boon sse£Knod, Y u hive olr#dy srLsod Not naoinotiy the pnble~J ©on/~ont~nir us tn doooastl~tinG tho l~lOtivo dolproo, st Usual oF dAF£oz~nt p1~tu@te. Tn one roepoete x~e@ent ¢3sou4e*~S¢ vould lead us to question the aseumpt£on t~ust u l~duotlon in th~ intake of knovn c~ro/~oKens vo~Ld noeoo~urily oo~ro~ a oon- sidol~blo beno£itp althoud~ vo you, d eertaln~y not Irieds to see the /ntsJko of these eubstanooe rLtaod. Cul~ront l~e~ £J~d/n~o are co~vorsi~r in ~nstN¢~ ~t tebaoee eke bohvoe nob more as a promoter o£ ea~o~~sle ~ as an ~tlator. Coneoquont~Lyo it ~s~d be q~Lto poeo£bio for • ooummor to aequiro Che nooeeaa~y dose ot ~ai¢£ator by way of atmosphor~e pollution and For the repeated intake, of amoko thereby to pro- vide the subsequent promotion. The ev£donoo £s tl~t the promoter aotivlty of smoke and send.no.to is not assee~atod vtth the polyeyelle hydrocarbon uatertaXs in smoke and the effort on £~nd~ng vays oF r~tuc~ those partAeular substanoeo -4~t somovhat relaxed £n the futua*o. ~Io ~u are fl~t 4" @ale~ that i dmonotnttioa tos~Loi~ p~oopoeti~ survey, the~o al~ i]Llq~dy otnvo ~ tho vl~d that ~-t ~o~ve~me~t b04£oo, may ~ p~ to lay d~ teat lp~ot~e~ls tot the m~tie~ ot ~/~i~ ol~ttoo. ' Xf the nod£Fled Nots paso these toot atandardso ~o~ so~o 8rounds for hope that they nay ~oeoi~ XAm~t~t oadors~ent by Government Health Authoz~tioe, The st£mu~Lum for this development has been given by the possibilities a£foz~tod by nov ~mek~n4~ matel-4aAs of vox~Louo k~ndo (C~t~ol, NSN9 ore.), aA~~ ~t mast be very un£1ko~y that t~eH ~m~L4 ro~ek m~et ea~~ an overt health claim by the industry. Xt 8~eh toot protocols s~ro a~o t~e~ o~LearXy we slu~l have • oXeeur obJoet£vo at ~oh to a~- in • ~Joot 8ueh is FI~RYBRTJ~E. 0 0

-2- Koanv~tloo v• have alz~mdy undertaken tvo oiler•tie dosiE~z oxoroisoso vtt'Loh may be oonsidol~d to be l~lOVant to F~UR~E. They ax~l (e) ~ob No. 1~ (Old ~oJeet Xo. 540~) ~.~oati.vo8 Doslsn st blended clear•tie oF reduced bio- ~o~o01 sct£vitx to the tolZovLnG spoa~ftaaUon0 ~.~.~, 84-8~ ~. .z~t.= Ro.=.le...~2.%,, up to 14 c8 w. .~,...~.!!.v:~, ~ot nor. th~ 10 =c. .Ni%o~.o.~.l.l.v.o.~, Not ,or. tun 1.2 =t (~pt ,.o .~) .Zm~2et! Caeapaxlble to control blended o4Ksrotte. R~.uc.tAo2 o£..,lo.Zoj~.Z .x.%t.~v.t!y, ~ per el~,tto .1I gIoasMyo roIa~Ivo ;3 ~o control olwette. ~oliYOI"Y OF VApOU~ P~SOO CO|El)Onsets| ee~e C4~rbo6 ~oJ3ozido; ..... ;o'~l;I~;'£~a~i;~'~.~I8;;-t; be lover ~ the control Oi~SLl~t to, Smo~Lr~ C~-tnetel-~stieol To be o~tie£iOtOl"~, ~thout "'- ~""~?-~l;~'~'S1~nd costs. P~...~.ssi Most oF the design t~r~ets h-re been met 8nA ws'hopo to issue an LntexdJ ropo~t JJl • month or rye. (I,) Job No. 14 (0ld P~oJeet No. 33~3~ ObJ~otlveJ To p1~4~o0 elamples o£ tllterotippod ~l~n~etto8 .... G~blonda 00nta~nLr~up to 50~oonotitutod tob~eoo end designed to h~ve • smoke taste and flavour ~b~eh lies ylthl~ aooopt~bZe Z~m~tl. Short- tez~nbioZo~lc~l torts ~11 be applied to 8~mploo ogles•eden tJ~ basi~ 0£ 8~t£sftOtOl~ to~teemd P z~J|Possi Tb~o pz~eot 40 p~oceedlnK 08tisf~otol"lly and ';~table rumples m to be gub~tttod to short-tom bioaos~y. Tboeo 81-o i4mod to offo~ • U~oblend~t t~po~ • ~Lt~poen •t~-~tll~d tTpo 8did in Ol-~O~ltol type 1J1 terms of taste aJtd f~a~lr •s~oennoatSo We oJro~ hovever0 not yet l~8dF to muhnlt • report. You v~11 ago From the above that ve have undertaken • tvo-p~onirod approaoh| oo~.. .w

°~- (1) A pr~bduot vlth mAn/mun bleXeg/eal aetlv/t7 and aeceptable taste and tlavour, (ll) A produot vlth bAShAy aeeeptabXe taste and tlavgmr, and vith rs4haeed bioZel~Leal aet£vlty. OF these, (l) is eXe~rlF eXoser to t~o apirAt oF Nr. BXuott's proposal, but (Ll) may be • prodwnt whArJs ~uAd be easier, to market as Ats taste may yell be more aeooptabXe and :Lt vou/d bo composed oF more oonvontionaAty~sod mster£aXo, althmaSh in sreQter amounts than is usually the case. • tx~ot that this note ~La /t you ~ in s~Lm~ and t3~t, ~Ltlt~Ln a £e~ months, ve sit.X1 Mayo svs£Xable a xt~Ge oF p~duots aAmod at the two 8~aXs montionod oarlier. eo t Dr. S.J. Green X,B,D. Bluet~e Esq. P m

TrPlCTLY ~IYAT~ & CONFIDENTIAL To: I.B.D. BLUETT, ES .:. From: W.B. F~YCE. Thank you for your notes. I suggest Dr. Felton and Dr. Haslam be brought in at this stage, end that the subject be kept within this group until concrete proposals are developed, R. & D. 's biological lxogramme over recent years has exposed • range of tobacco types and reconstituted products to a number of tests. The credLbUiW of each test when applied to the human situation is always a matter for argument, but those by which I would set the greatest store are the protracted mouse-skin test, and the simple and familiar TP,~! determination. To these should be added some teat for irritation, of which there ere a few reasonably convincing examples. As you know, Dr. Felton is our expert in this field, and l wLU confine myself to generalities at the moment. Safety in most contexts is relative, end the standard against which anything new would be measured will be fairly specific for • given market or counlry. Commercial cigarettes are rarely given am/ comprehensive biological screening, but tt would be possible to give • bioloqical specification for "typical" cigarettes from Germany, the U.K., and the U.S.A..Taking such a specification as the standard, tt is possible to de~ine the safer product numertcaUy. Having done so, there is, of course, no proof, nor is there going to be, that the defined cigarette is a safer'commodity in human terms. Such proof could come from long-term epidemiology (20 - Z$ years}, but I doubt if the expense would be Justified. We can look forward to • SlOW refinement of our biological tests, some gain in their credibility, the development of new ones - but that is about el/. However, there must be some benefit, perhaps a considerable one, in lowering the intake of the known carcinogens and poisons, and the possible lowering in many cases is significant. If these are built into the product specification, together with reduced responses in biological systems, the end-result is an article quite different in taste and construction from the knOWn product. It will not be proved safer, but it wtU be possible to reasonably allege that the smoke is less harmful. 0 o o o

"2- We should, e8 • next 8top, 8eok Dr. Folton'8 oomment8 on the proposltton ltseU, and on the dlr~tlon fmo.her dovslopment8 might take. W.B. FOtU3YCE c.c. Dr. 8.1. Green c.c. Dr. D.G. Pelion c.c. Dr. F. H88hlm ~" 8. 6.72. C~ 0 0 r~

BAT BRITISH-AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY LIMITED Millbank REF TO DR. D.G. FELTON DR. F. HASLAM/ PROM W.B. FORDYCE. WBF/FA D^T~ 7th June, 1972. FERRYBI~DGE Ian Bluett has raised the possibility of a development project, to which the above code-name has been assigned. Other details foUow; the project for the moment is STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL. ,"-~ .-4-~--..C / ,. I c:,- .... ; "r., W.B. FORDYCE - 8 JUNi-;72 , t 1 t i t ! c.c.I.B.D. Bluett, Esq. O ¢3 G