Tobacco Documents Online

I. Puff Count L It is generally accepted that at least about 8 puffs are needed for a commercially acceptable cigarette. Resnik is silent as to how to relate circumference (C) to number of puffs (n). Howeuer, Resu~ik'm Fig%Lre 1 relates SBRd (static burn rate distance in mm/min) to puff count, and Resnik's Fig. 8 relates SBRd to C. Following Resnik's linear relationship shown on Fig. 8., and likewise making a linear extrapolation from that~ ¢ figure as the Geneva Cour~ did from Fig. 9, then Fig. 8 {~¢~ " " ""t "~L extrapolates to SBRd = 7.6 at 15 mm circumference and SBRd = r • at 17 mm circumference. Plotting those points against j / extrapolated puff count from Resnik's Fig. 1 gives n - 6.25 a~ ~ .~ ~ C = 15 mm and n = 6.73 at C = 17 mm. These predicted values" ~O>~ are too low for commercially acceptable cigarettes, and are fa~_~~v~ . ~,.~,,~~ below actual values obtained following the Luke invention: ~ /~ [ t".' 6.25 vs. 8.2 actual puffs for 15 mm circumference and 6.73, J//~ puffs vs. 13.8 actual puffs for 17 mm circumference. /#~w~ (I._. }L Thus, Resnik's "predictions" as to puff count teach away from the Luke invention and demonstrate that Luke's high puff count is unexpected. At the same time, this extrapolation .......... ££8 S00 t BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

\ from Resnik's teachings demonstrates that even if a person skilled in the art made the extrapolation from Figure 9, he would not be!ieve such an extrapolation to be of any value. 2. Total Tobacco Weight Another aspect of the Luke invention is increased efficiency of tobacco utilization. Total tobacco burned may be calculated a number of ways. One is nWp + (n-l) SBRm x time between puffs. Where Wp = weight burned per puff - 2 - O O ~n tn Po t~ ~D BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

\ Assuming n - 8, then n - i - 7. We further assume that the time between puffs is about 1 minute (smoking machine 2 sec. puff, 58 sec. pause) and $BR= is at the minimum ~/ smolder of 60 mg/min.--~.~.... ~ ~co-- ~ For Wp, Yamamoto et. al., =Effect of Cigarette Circumference or Weight Loss During Puffs and Total Delivery of Tar and Nicotine', Beitraqe zur Tabakforschunq International, Vol. 12. No. 5, Nov. 1984, pp. 259-269, states that We is proportional to radius "r" [5]. From Yamamoto's Table 4, Wp for C - 25 is about 26 mg (average of Virginia and American blends). Table 5 adjusts for ash content to get total weight ~ , loss after the ash is discarded, for n puffs: ~ where A ash content, about. 5 haverag. for W, for 15 mm is then expected to be about W,.s - W,:~ x ri__%5 - 15.6 r25 and nW~,s/(1-A) - 8(15.6)/(i-0.1,5) - 145 mg and (n-I)SBR. - 7(60) . 420 or a total of 566 mg tobacco burned. Allowing for a 10% butt (I0 mm of 100 mm for Ex. A & B), total tobacco is 566/.9 - ~29 mg/ Thus, Yamamoto predicts ! about 629 mg of tobacco is needed for 8 puffs at a - 3 - (0243B) CD t.n CD BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

\ circumference of 15 mm. In fact, Ex. A of the invention at 15 mm got 8.2 puffs, with only about half the total tobacco weight, or 325 mg. This proves the invention's unexpected two times greater efficiency of tobacco utilization, as set forth in claim 16 of Re. 32,615. 4. Taste/Tar ~~ Another of the unexpected results of our invention is that with half the tobacco (Ex. A versus Ex. Orthodox), sufficient tar is delivered in the mainstream smoke (T~) for acceptable taste. Yamamoto states that T, is proportional to rz. Applying that ratio to the data in Re. 32,615 for Ex. A and Ex. orthodox, T, for 15 mm would be expected to be: = (Cz~ICzs) - 14.5 (15"/25z) - 5.22 In fact, example A delivere~ nearly twice as much, proving again the unexpected nature of our invention as claimed. ~~ ~-~ - 4 - (0243B) CD CD t31 tJ~ t~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

m -I 0 0 C3. 0 C 3 r~ r- ¢1o m ii m im ,1- m i 0 0 ¢.D / ~b F -2 I

100553243 \ \ 4./._ \ \ \ .,,,~ -~~' I o ._o o, I,,,,, .~ c,,b ' o 8 ell

° UK Patent Application 1211 Al~IC~On No 86122.35 ~22) O~e cd I;n9 20 M4y 1986 (301 Pwio.ly data {31) 8513233 {32J 24 May 1986 {33! G8 L711.44~P~m~ Sri;ish-AmedCSn To~I¢co Con~or~ Umltod (Unltld K;ngdomi. WesUnk~star Harm,, 7 MUIbank~ London SW1 P 3JE 172} k.p,.~ or Jo~n Anthony Luke |74; Aglmt imdlm' Addroml for SMvlce K, J. )4. Me,earn. BAT |UK and E~portp Urrdted. Preterits Section. Rems't:~ & DeveJoprnlnt Con/r11. Ralgents PMk ROid. Sour.hamptoa SOS 1PE (51) INT C1.' ,,,, 2 175 A (43) A~auo~ ~s~ed 10 Dec lgRfi A24o 1/9o (621 Dm~ullc ~ss~.e~n IEd~Jon HI: *'12C 28 (6B) D.)cumm~ts cited i~ione A2C SoJecte~ US We.';ficstk)ns ~ IPC svb-class A2,iO !S4) Improvemm~ts relating to smoking ;articles (sT) A ci~)~ette comp~ses 8 tobacco rod of tobacco filler wrapped in a paper wrapper, the ¢i~cum(eret~ce of the rod being within a range of 10 mm to 19 rnm 8nd the free burn rale of the rod being withi, a r;.,.F," of 25 to 45 mg rain '. The cigarette may comprise considerably less tobacco ~ a ¢~garatte of ortl:u(l~,x circurn|erence yet yield an equal or greater number of puffs. U...; i,o -,.j Ol O J 'C..C~ O G (.~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

III 2175789 / 2 3 0 0 r~ j~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

GB2 175789A 1 SPECIFICATION Improvement= relating to smoking m'rJc[es 5 This invention relates to cigarettes end like smoking ertides. 5 It is a requisite of cigarettes of commercially Imcaptabia quality that when lit but not being s~z~oked, the coal continues to burn. at a slow rate, a condition usually refened to as smoulder- ing. A number of cigarette design parameters affect the arnoLdder rate. otherwise known as the has or static burn rate. One of these is the air permeability of the cigarette paper; the lower the tU a=r permeabiUty, the lower Is the =shoulder rata. Anod~r factor re~ting to smoulder rata is the 10 amount of tobacco which is consumed in unit time. It has previously been thought that for an acceptable linear ¢moulder rata. a minimum amount of about 60 mg of tobacco had to be consumed per minute in order to assure the maintenance in the coal of enough heat to sustain th~ coal in Lts smouldering condition. This factor has heretofore been seen to make it necessary I!~ I()r a cigarette rod of the usual circular cross section to have s circumference of at Least about 15 22 mm il tl~e cig0rette was to smoulder in e reliable manner. The present invention provides a cigarette comprising a tobacco rod which rod comprises a tobacco filler and a paper wrapper, the circumference of said rod being within s range of 10 mm • - io 19 ms, preferably 12.5 mm to 19 ms. and the free burn rate of said rod being within 8 "~(} r:,nge of 25 to 50 mg sin". preferably being within a range of 25 to 45 mg sin-', end more 20 j.elerab~y within a range of 30 to 45 mg sin-to The present invention is based on our finding that in point of fact cigarettes having circumfar- ,,.cos of 19 mm or less and free burn rates of 45-50 mg sin i or less smoulder in e fully a-ceptabie manner and that in addition such cigarettes exhibit a number of sigruficant practical 2!; advantages. 25 There is no necessity in order to provide cigarettes according to the present invention which s.Pou)dor reliably between pulls re make compensatory adjustments to the cigarette paper air i,,~fmeobility value or to provide the cigarette paper with unorthodox levels of burn rate promot- i~ql addJlives, or Jn fact to make compensateW sdjustn'mnta in regard to any olher parameters 3t) which affect smoulder rate. 30 The packing density o! the rod may be within a range of 150 mg cm = to 350 mg cm =. and preferably within a range of 200 mg cm = to 300 mg cm ~. Cigarettes according to the present invention utilise tobacco with increased efficiency. Thus a cigarette may be provided according to the present invention which, compared with a cigarette ~5 ol orthodox dimensions, having, for exampie, a circumference of 2,5 ms, comprises considerably 35 I.ss touacco. 25% less for example, and yet which provides an equal at least number of pulls. The actual number of pulls, w~l, of course, by dependent inter alia upon the iangttl of the cz.qarette tobacco rod. For unit ~eng(h of tobacco rod, the reduction in the cigarette paper requirement is, leaving the '~t') to.qitudinal lap seam out of account, directly proportional to rod diameter recluc~ion, whereas the 40 =aductmn in tobacco requirements is. assuming constant pecking density, in proportion to the ratio of the squares of the diameters. Thus in unit length of a cigarette accordLng to the present ~nvention the ratio of mass of cigarette paper to mass of tobacco is higher than that for a c:kF-~retto of conventional circumference at equal packing den~tiae. Thus in cigarettes according • 1!; to the present invention, exceptionally firm ash formations are obtainable. 45 In that cigarettes may be provided according to the present invention which contains loss tobacco than orthodox cigarettes at equal puff numbers, cigarettes according to the present invention exhibit lower smoke component mainstream and sidestream deliveries. l; has been observed in companng cigarettes according to the present invention with orthodox ~.~(J ci~10rettes of at the same number of cuts per inch. that the cigarettes according to the present bO inverJtion are ul firmer fee[ than the orthodox cigarettes, in other words, the same filler in the h~vontiva ogarattes apparently has a higher filling power than when it is incorporated in orthodox ,:.l;iroit0s. It is surmised that this phenomenon may dodve from the increase in the retie of the re, tun particle size of the filler to the cross-sectional area of the tobacco rod. It does mean f,!J dmugh It,at for equal filling power values, a reduction in tobacco weight may be made over and 55 ub¢)vo Ihat resulting directly from the reduction in tobacco rod cross-sectional area. Preferably. cigarettes according to the present invention are such as to provide 5 to 15 puffs. and mole preferably 5 to 10 puffs, when smoked under standard machine smoking conditions. ie at 35 cc puffs of 2 seconds duration at I minute intervals. I;O The tobacco filler may comprise expanded tobacco, reconstituted tobacco or substitute smok- 60 incj matorials. The tobacco rods of cigarettes according to the present invention may be at a truss-section other than round. They may, for example, be of elliptical or rectilinear cross- S (."¢: | ion. If cigarettes according to the present Invention are fitted with filters and the filters ere of the I~!:, sumo transverse dimensions as the tobacco rods, there will be a saving in filter material 65 O O Lrl U'I r~ j~ c~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

2 • ° GB2 175 789A ;J requbemente compared with those of orthodox Fd(er tipped cigarettes. It may be obsa~ved in rolauon to the conventional form of filter comprising cellulose acetate, that s red~tion in cei~losa acetate tow ut~Jsetion can be affected without there necessarily being a ci'~nge in presstur-, drop in go~ng from orthodox fgter circumferences to circumferences appropriate for R filters for attachment to cigarettes according to the present invention. ', For constant pressure drops and for unit length of tilter the tow requirement is, in loot. reduced by an amount ~ excess of that suggested by the ratio of the areas of conventicn~ a,.I inventive cigarette. By usa of the present invention significant reductions in packaging material requkemems I~J+ 10 unit cigarette may be reailaed. I,, A cigarette ~n accordance with the present invention is shown in the accompanying dia~jru, n- rnatic drawing and is generally des~gnamd by reference numeral 1. The cigarette 1 comprises cigarette paper 2 wrapped about • cut tobacco Idler, to provide a tobacco rod, an end portion of which fi~er is referenced 3. Cigarette 1 further comprises a tipping wrapper 4 which serves to 15 maintain o filter, of ce~ulosa acetate tow for example, in abutment with the end of the tobacco 15 ~er remote end 3 thereoL The overall ~ength of cigarette 1 is 120 mm and the diamter is 5 mm. Cigarettes in accordance with the invention were made having tobacco rod lengths of 100 mm to which were attached 20 mm long filters. These cigarettes were made in two circumferences. 2.0 15 ram and 17 ram. the cigarettes being designated A and B respectively. Under standard 2U smoking condition=, measurements were made of the feral delLveries of mainstream smoke particulate matter, on a water and nicotine free basis, and of total nicotine alkaloids. By way of comparison° similar measurements were made for an orthodox commercially marketed ckjarelto of 25 mm circurnlerence and having tobacco rod and liller lengths of 64 mm and 20 mm 25 respectively. The results are as shown in the table below. 7!J 3O 35 4O PUWNF (mg) TNA (=g) PUFF NUMBEE TOBACCO WEIGHT (mE) 9.6 0.81 8.2 325 B 16.0 ,1.34 13.8 650 ORTHODOX 14.5 1.26 9.3 884 3t) The fable clearly indicates the eflectiveness of the present invention in utiiising tobacco at a. increased level of efficiency. Tobacco filters used in cigarettes according to the present invention may be of conventional 45 cuts per inch or above or below the conventional range. ". :=I=, 4!, CLAIMS 1. A cigarette comprising s tobacco rod which rod comprises a tobacco tiger and a paper wrapper, the circumference of sa~d rod being within a range of 10 turn to 19 mm and the [fee 50 burn ram of said rod being within a range of 25 to 50 mg rain-'. 5() 2. A cigarette as ciakned in Claim 1, wherein said circumference is within i range of 12.5 mtn to 19 ram. 3. A cigarette as da~'ned in CLaim I or 2, wherein said free burn rate is within a range of 3U to 45 mg min-t 55 4. A cigarette as claimed in Claim 1. 2 or 3. wherein the pecking density of said tobacco 5!, filler is within a range of 150 mg ¢m"= to 350 mg crn =. S. A cigarette as deemed in Claim 4. wherein the packing density of said tobacco rigor is within a range of 200 mg ¢m"= to 300 mg crn =, 6. A cigarette as claimed in any one of the pceceding claims and further comprising a filter u[ 60 the same transverse dimensions as said rod. r ,, 7. A cigarette as claimed in any one of the preceding claims, the tobacco fglar of said rod thereof comprising at least 25 par cent less tobacco than that of an equal length rod of a control cigarette at 25 mm circumference, the number of puffs provided by said cigarelte bei.U _. + ......... i ...+ ...... , ... # _ st. . - , ~ , ., + .. .. =,,.,= (::) C~ Crl (j'l L,,J [,,o .....U BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

~,g,. 3 GB2 175789A 3 mar.brae smoking conditiorm. 9. A cigarette as claimed ~ Claim 8 giving 10-15 puffs. 10. A ciganztzo substandagy as hwoinboforo described with reference to the drawing hereof. % ] (.~ • OJ BATCo document for Legal Services - Health Canada 20 May 1999

Technical Memorandum REST~RCH • OEVELOPMI~T CENTRE IOJI'N AJm~l~l~ Su~ Au~o~ To Circuladon R~ Key words NO. TR.87.06.005 PROJECT ALPHA- CAPRI STUDY SIDESTREAM BRAND SURVEY PoD. Case A.L. Heard- Nillbank Dr. R.R. Baker 46M Da~e 17~h June 1987 SJdestream Smoke ~alnstream ~aoke PI~IF TNA Carbon Monoxide Carbon Dtoxide Puff Number Brands Air Permeability Blend Composition Physlca~ ~asurements CD L~ L~ N CONFIDENTIAL -NOT TO BE COPIED OR SHOWN TO UNAUTHORISED PERSONS BATCo document for Legal Services Health Canada 20 May 1999

POC/Bl't,f/46M 17th June 1987 PROJECT ALPHA - CAPRI STUDY SIDESTREAH BRAND SURVEY SUHMARY Due to the interest in the Brown & kfilliamson product Capri a sldestream brand analysis survey has been undertaken on the sidestream yields from a variety of United States Domestic produ=s. The data in the memo shows that Capri has the lowest sidestream PMk~IF delivery of all the U.S. Domestic brands currently tested. -i- J 0 0 (_,.m r~ 0 I'~ll7 B A.T IU.)~. axmd Ezp,~) l ,m,ed T)us repL-,rz musz no( be cnp&ed ~ s,h~,'n to unaudtonsed pe.rsons. ...................................... BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

CONTENTS i. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION a) Sidestream Yields b) Pressure Drop and Ventilation Measurements c) Cigarette Dimensions d) Blend Data e) Rod Weights f) ~instream Deliveries I .1 3 3 4 6 7 8 10 4. CONCLUSIONS ii 5. RECOMMENDATIONS II REFERENCES ii APPENDIX I 12 -ii - Q 0 ~J BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-l- I. INTRODUCTION As a result of interest expressed in low circumference cigarettes since the launch of Capri on the US Market, a brand survey of nine United States Domestic Market products has been undertaken. In addition an internal control cigarette and a Virginia product have also been tested. The cigarettes have been subjected to sidestream analyses using the Fish-tail system (1). Yainstream, blend and physical measurements have also been done on the cigarettes. The data has been collated in this Technical Mamorandum and observations/explanations are given where possible on the sidestreem performance of these products. 2. ~'THODOLOGY Standard BAT (UK&E) R&DC analytical methodology has been used throughout this study. The butt length smoked to with all cigarettes was overtip plus 3 mm. Sidestream yields have been determined on the Fish-tail system as mentioned previously. Differences between puff number exist between the sidestream and mainstream analyses, this is because currently automatic butt detection is not available on the Fish-tail systm. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (a) Sidestream Yields Table 1 gives the sidestream yields on the products ranked in order of decreasing sidestream PMWNFyield. Additionally, in Table I the sidestream yields are expressed in terms of per gram of dry tobacco (or nicotine) burnt, i.e. taking into account the rod length, density, moisture content and blend nicotine results, see Tables 3 and 4. ~) l~14T B A T I L~ IC. aa,l Et~w'¢; I .reLied Thins rc~w-t must ~oc be ¢nl~cd or ,~'to~n Lo u~suthonscd pcrlloe=s. O LT1 p~J U~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-2- TABLE 1 SIDESTREAM YIELDS (~ASURED AND CALCULATED) Product Name Virginia Slims Camel Benson & Hedges A279 Farl boro Lights Msrit Vantage ]~rclay ~rlboro Box J, Doral Lights Capri Sidestream yields (mg rig"~) PMWNF TNA 30.1 4.09 29.6 4.34 29.3 5.30 28.8 5.08 28.6 3.91 28.3 4.17 28.2 4.13 27.3 4.37 ',26.4 3.61 21.2 2.52 20.3 2.64 Note: Benson & Hedges is a BAT A279 is an internal R&DC Calculated Sidestream Yield mg Per Gram Dry ~terial (Tobacco and Nicotine) m Puff CO CO2 No. P~IF TRA CO CO2 50.2 3gl 10.3 53.3 338 76.0 592 64.7 447 8.5 48.g 1377 91.6 633 55.5 428 9.7 46.2 338 75.7 583 75.9 521 9.4 42.8 !328 95.7 657 49.7 387 g.o 51.1 343 76.1 592 50.8 366 8.0 53.5 353 81.7 588 151.0 346 7.4 50.9 362 79.6 540 51.4 418 10.0 48.7 352 78.9 642 42.4 34g 9.0 43.8 296 61.7 508 47.8 335 6.8 43.1 327 83.1 583 43,7 226 9.3 55.3 326 103.1 627 (UK&E) Produced Product. Virginia Product. In terms of PMI~F Capri is the lowest product tested within this series being 33% below Virginia slims. It would be expected that as the rod weight burnt, decreased (see Table 5) the sidestream yield would fall. This is plotted in graphical format in Figure I, Clearly with the exception of Dotal Lights and Capri no such trend is apparent. 0 0 L~4 r,o (j~ C.N (~ I~T B A T iL" K ~ IZ~¢~w~i L=m,~e,~ Th~$ rep=~ mutZ ao~ be ended or ,.horn to una~on~ pe~ons BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-3- The reason for this is unclear particularly since other linear trends have been illustrated in the past relating sidestream P~F to tobacco rod weight burnt (Z,3). However, these results relate to products which had the same blend type incorporated in them, and with a product survey of this nature the blend composition and PMWNF potential of each material is unknown. To illustrate this point data is given in Appendix I which shows the sidestream PMW~F potential of 100% Virginia lamina and 100% Virginia stem. Similar points can also be raised on sidestream carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide deliveries. Examination of sidestream nicotine yields is more meaningful because the sidestream nicotine yield can be influenced by the blend nicotine, this is illustrated in Figure Z. In this situation the sidestream nicotine yield is plotted against the nicotine weight smoked {calculated fro the rod weight smoked, the moisture content and the blend nicotine). Regression analysis of this data provided the following equation: Sidestream nicotine = 0.333 x nicotine weight smoked + 0.08. y = M . X + C where the RZ value was 0.9 and the intercept is not statistically significantly different to the origin. Thus, the sidestream nicotine yields are explainable within the product survey, being related to the nicotine weight smoked. Examination of the calculated sldestream yields per gram of tobacco burnt in Table I shows that for carbon monoxide and PMWNF, Capri has the highest yield. Alternatively, the greatest PI~F and carbon monoxide sidestream production efficiency comes from Capri. This is not surprising bearing in mind Capri is virtually an all lamina blend with no stem and little reconstituted tobacco (see also Appendix I). However, because of the low rod weight of Capri on a per cigarette basis it is still the lowest sidestreem Pt~F yield of the brands surveyed in this study. o ~) I'~.W7BAT II.:K and E,p,,nlL,mJted T~$r~l~nmusZ,~ocbecnp~edorsho~etounauthoesc,,d pef-.~a$. w C) O U'I P,J (..n BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

Ooral Lights has a sidestream PMI~F yield only slightly above that of Capri, this is due to the low rod weight of the sample (Table 5) because of a high level (27.8%) of expanded tobacco being present in the blend. Similar comments apply to the gas phase results for carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. The sidestream nicotine yield is lower in Doral Lights than Capri, this is a consequence of both the low tobacco rod weight of Doral Lights and the low blend nicotine level (Table 4) relative to Capri. (b) Pressure Drop and Ventilation Measurements Table 2 details these results. Essentially the rod pressure drops are similar for the majority of these products but with the low circumference cigarettes the rod pressure drops rise as reported previously (2). The paper permeability range covered in this survey will have no effect on the sidestream performance of these products. C) C~ r~J C~ 19.~7 B A T I L~ I~. an~ E ~p,~n J L~m,~'d Th~s report mus~ not be tripled o~ sho~.n m unau~onsed persons. BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-5- TABLE Z PRESSURE DROP A~ND VENTILATION ~/LSURE~NTS Sample Virginia Slin~s Came] Benson & Hedges ~7g • rlboro Lights~ ~rit Vantage Barclay • rlboro Box Doral Lights C~pri Total P.D. Cram w.G.) Unbound 111 I17 122 142 122 118 150 52 II0 146 139" Total P.D. (ram w.G.) Bound 171 125. 141 147 15B 161 159 ll3 Z51* Rod P.D. (ram W.G.} 74 61 54 51 49 52 56 52 48 65 149 FJ Iter P.D. (ram W.G. 97 64 68 go g8 106 105 107 65 81 lOZ" Paper )ermeabi I i ty (c.u.) 33 38 69 51 24 • 35 44 25 26 21 28 ~& Filter Venti l ati on 45 10 40 23 36 11 82 84 52 "~asured on P.O. tester for small cigars. (~ I~N7 B A T ,C: K. and E,t~w~I, L~m.ed Thins repnrt musl n~ be cnp.ed or sbo~. [o enaud~ons~l persons. 0 0 Un. U~ 1",,3 U'I Cr,, BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

--6- (c) Cigarette Dimensions Table 3 details the results, the majority of products are of King Size dimensions with Yarlboro Box being a 79 mm length product and Virginia Slims and Capri being longer length and lower circumference than the rest. TABLE 3 DI~'NSIONS Sample Virginia Sl i ms camel Benson & Hedges A27g Marl boro Lights Merit Vantage Barclay Yarl boro Box Dotal Lights Capri Total Rod Length (m) 98 67 84 64 84 64 84 64 84 57 84 57 84 59 84 57 7g 60 84 57 g7 70 Tobacco Rod Length (~) Filter Rod Length (ram) 31 2O 20 20 27 27 25 27 lg 27 27 Over-Tl ppi ng Length (=m) 36 25 24 24 31 32 30 32 23 31 32 Circumference (ram) 23.17 24.75 25.12 24.73 24.75 24.83 25.04 24.72 24.7z 24.82 16.83 1987 B.A.T I U.K. ~ Ezp~) ].~I. "~ repo~ must nm be c~qpi~l or ~zow. m m~nndzocis~9 p~n, om,. Rod Length Smoked {ram) 59 56 57 57 5O 49 51 49 53 S0 62 O G C~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-7- (d) Blend Data Table 4 contains the blend data. Ignoring Capri the BAT and Philip Morris products all contain about approximately 10% expanded tobacco whereas the R.J. Reynolds products contain more {- 14) for C~mel and Vantage and 2B~ for Dotal Lights). ~is causes some loss in puff number with these products (Table 6). ~e sugar chemistry for all products except Benson and Hedges and ~7g is typical of U.S. blended style products. Interestingly the two previously mention~ Virginia products have the highest blend nicotines and highest sidestream nicotine yields (Table I) of the pr6ducts tested. TABLE 4 ~END DATA Sample Virginia Slims C~mel ~nson & Hedges ~79 ~rlboro Lights ~rit Vantage Barclay ~rlboro Box Ooral Lights Capri Nicotine (% d.w.b.) 2.14 1.90 2.47 2.30 Z.03 2.22 2.06 Z.22 2.07 1.57 2.21 Reducing Sugars (% d.w.b.) 9.0 9.8 14.1 17.9 "- 8.4 9.9 g.g 8.9 8.5 9.4 9.1 Total Sugars (% d.w.b. ) 11.6 I0.4 16.0 19.8 ll.B I1.6 II .0 II .7 i1.5 I0.6 12.0 ~ller DensitX (mg cc-~) 247 247 244 Z82 25,$ Z47 241 262 256 222 293 8.9 14.0 10.1 N.M. 9.3 9.8 I4.4 7.8 I0.1 27.8 None % ~isture at Smoking 14.5 14.3 13.6 15.1 14.3 14.9 I3.6 13.9 14.2 14.4 13.5 N.M. = Not measured. 0 0 t.N CO Ig17 &A.T IU.IC a~l E=pQ~] I.Um~ecl. T~s ~por~ muse no¢ 1~ copmd or sho~-~ to u~muJ~'ised BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-8- (c) Rod Weights Table 5 details the results, the rod weight smoked takes into account the butt length to which the product was smoked to. The dry rod weight then takes account of the moisture content and the nicotine weight smoked also takes into account the blend nicotine levels. The data is merely collated and no comment is made. 0 C~ C~ C~ ~0 1957 ILA.T | U.K. and E=pen.I, [.umccd. T'h~ repol,~ mesa. a~ be COlpied ot sl~.wv.n m mululhom, ed ~ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

CD 0 o Q. o r- 3 0 I-" el 0 *l m m 0 m m Q, m o m ,< to to @ W -4 1 [ 3 g i sl 6 i Total Rod F! lter Tip Sample (g) (g) (g) Virginia Slfms Camel Benson & Hedges A279 ~rlboro Lights Ferlt Vantage I~rclay l~rlboro Box Doral Lights Capri 0.970 0.974 0.979 1.0S 0.964 0.949 1.080 1.030 0.929 0.871 0.585 N.M. = Hot measured. o.lsl 0.807 0.824 0.89 0.744 0,734 0,741 0.757 0,778 0.656 0.479 -9- TABLE G ROD HE IGIITS 0.2]9 0.167 0.155 0.166 0.220 0.225 0.339 0.273 0.151 0.215 0.106 Filter Cigarette HeLL Paper (g) (g) 0.169 0.130 0.122 0.129 0.169 0.173 0,290 0.210 0.116 0.160 0.073 0.054 0.048 0.056 H.H. 0.048 0.049 0.049 0.048 0.050 0.047 0.038 Rod Weight Smoked (g) .661 • 706 .734 .793 .653 .642 .641 .651 ,687 ,575 .424 Hicotlne ~tght Smoked (mg) 12.1 11 .G 15.7 15.5 11.4 11.8 11.4 12.4 12.2 7.7 8.1 Dry Rod Height Smoked (1) .565 .605 .634 .673 .560 .529 .554 .561 .603 .492 .367 097c 001

-10- (d) Mainstream Deliveries Table 6 gives the results and no detailed comment is made on the individual product deliveries apart from to say that blend chemistry, filter pressure drop and ventilation will all influence the deliveries. %. 0 0 (Jl ~N Po 1987 ILA.T t U.K. ~wI E~l~m) ~ This r~3ort must not Ix ~l}i~l or sbowu Io ~msudmris~ lm-~. BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

$ 3" ,=,-~ v ¢_ e.- A E A =.'T =~..= E oa=_~ E A "T b.- E i E ~3 v~ meoeooeee ooeomoele*a aooe ooe~e~ =eletuoe*ee L CU >'~ L,. ..,I C-- E e" r.,,,. I..f,,. C r_ L r... L ~t ~J E 0 Z II G 0~ r~ 1987 LA.T (U.~ ~ E=~! L~mi~d. This rcpo~ must not be cc~ed or d~ov,~ to uwudwr~ed BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-12- CONCLUSIONS {a) (b) Capri produces the lowest sidestream PMWNF delivery of all the products tested within this brand survey, being 33% lower than Virginia slims. Sidestream nicotine yields are correlated with the nicotine weight smoked within this product survey. RECOMMENDATIONS ~though Capri is the lowest sidestream cigarette reported in this survey there may be other products on the U.S. Market which are below this and have not been tested. Thus care must be taken over any claims that are made for Capri. REF£RENCES I. BAT Report No. RD.1987-Restricted, 21.11.1984. 2. BAT Technical ~morandum 87.06.005, 16.6.1987. 0 C~ L~ L~ P~ C~ ~1 i917 &A.T ( U.{C aad E=~) lami~cL TI~ repoet mtt~ not be copied or d~o~ Io =maud~od~d peem=¢ BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

-12- APPENDIX I SIDESTREAM PARTICULATE PHASE YIELDS FROM ALL LAMINA /&DID STEM CIGARETTES Cigarette Code R231 T658 Blend Type 100% W.T.S 100% Virginia Lamina Rod Weight Smoked 810 740 51destream Yields (mgm cig- ) TNA 1.1B 12.6 32.0 5.43 T658 810 mg 35.0 5.94 Smoked li~erefore stem PM~A~F = 36~ of Lamina. Therefore stem TNA = 20% of Lamina. CD CD (,.,m r,,.) o"- BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

~3 i.= O_ It. 2: 2: Q. O t/1 ~p-t ua e 6LZV XOB ~UOglSVN --~v~v~--- ~NllS VlNIDSIh S£HOll O~Ogl~¥N I~d¥3 m c~, o ,,=, oI.m- e~ I-,,. o 0 r,,.) o',, BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999

W ,-I C) O O ('1 r-' 3 ,-z ,,,,,IN O "1 I" m GO (D m| (1} f,n -1- m m e"q" C') O ,,< {JD FIG. 2 SIDESTREAM NICOTINE YIELD VERSUS NICOTINE WEII~HT SMOKED SIDESTREAM NICOTINE DELIVERY (rag dg."1 ] 6 5 4 2 4 ~'~REfiRESSION LINE ( Y = H . X • C) :J Z~ ~, 8 1'0 (2 1"4 1'6 11i NICOTINE WEIGHT SMOKED No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 z6 CIGARETTE TYPE VIRGINIA SLIMS CAMEL BENSOH & HEGDES A 279 MARLBORO LIGHTS MERIT VANTAGE BARCLAY MARLBORO BOX DORAL LIGHTS CAPRI 99E cjcjOO!

.~Oll. r Bekrige zur Tab~forschung lntern;~ion=l • Volume 12 • No. 5 • November 1984 Effect of Cigarette Circumference on Weight Loss during Puffs and Total Delivery of Tar and Nicotine* 1,7. 7". Yamamoto, U. Anz= ~ Z Oh=d~ C_.anm=l Researcl~ Inszituze, The Japan Tobacco and Salt Pub~L" Corporazion, Yokobam~ Japan Ig -- filtration coef~iclentof tobacco col .u~ -- {'de.ration coefficient of Eker, If.~yI~ } _ experimental constamts depending Onblend type =d orkers. From these equations, the amount of car and oi¢ofiae in mainstream smoke can easily be est/ma=ed. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Uncut Verwendung yon Zigaretten gleicher FCdldichte und verschiedenen Umfangs ~'urde dee Gewicht.wer- lust wghrend eines Zuges, We ~md die Gesamtaus- beuu= an Kandensac and Nicotia gemesser~ Die Er- gebnlsse lassen =ice wie folgt zasammen~essen: E= be- steht tint [ast proporr.ionale Beziehung zwischen der Zugzahl, n, end dera Gewichtsverlust wihrend tines Zuges, Wp, einerseits and dem Radius dcr Zigarette andcrerseits. Die Ausbeute an gondensat und Nicotin htt dem Gewichcsverlu~t w~hrend der Z~ge nahezu proportional. Aus diescn Ergebnissrn wurden folgende Gldchungen abgddt=t: ffir Kondensat: T,- K, CW/L) e"~1' •"!4~ , f6r Nicotine N,- g. (W/L) (nJ~00) e"~A •"tht~ , 259 Q O Lyl L.q ! o,, I BATCo document for Legal Services • Health Canada 20 May 1999