Anne Landman's Collection
MARKET POTENTIAL OF A HEALTH CIGARETTE
Abstract
In this confidential, internal 1966 Philip Morris (PM) report, PM market researcher Myron Johnston, Jr. analyzes the feasibility of introducing a "health cigarette." The report shows that PM viewed medical reports linking cigarette smoking and disease as simply another driver for the cigarette market.
Ignoring the physical devastation their product causes hundreds of thousands of Americans, Johnston coldly observed that the American Cancer Society's conclusion that cigarettes cause disease in women as well as men could result in the generation of a whole new market for a "health cigarette":
"[Young women's] willingness to accept health filters may increase now that the American Cancer Society purports to have found a relationship between smoking and health for women as well as men. This group could provide a market for a health cigarette..."
and
"Women, and particularly young women, would constitute the greatest potential market for a health cigarette."
He suggests the strategy of marketing a "health cigarette" (or one with the illusion of being healthier) only when pressed to do so by authorities:
"My recommendation is that we not introduce a new health cigarette unless there is another health scare or additional restrictive legislation is passed. In the event of another health scare...our entry should be determined by the form of the scare..."
Johnston also touches on the addictive properties of nicotine as he observes:
"A cigarette that does not delivery nicotine cannot satisfy the habituated smker and cannot lead to habituation, and would therefore almost certainly fail.
He discusses the dynamics of smoking initiation among young people, saying,
"...Tobacco flavor is absent or far down the lists of reasons given for beginning to smoke, so it should be theoretically possible for a health cigarette to satisfy the most common reasons (to be like friends, to feel or look older, to combat nervousness, to be rebellious). This is apparently not the case. Young smokers are the ones...least likely to smoke health cigarettes..."
There is no mention in the report of empathy or concern for the fact that their products cause painful illness and early death among consumers, although Johnston states (on page 1000338652) that "Most smokers would rather quit than switch." The concern is clearly only to determine ways to market more cigarettes.
Fields
- Quotes
"A large proportion of smokers are concerned about the relationship of cigarette smoking to health..."
"The anti-cigarette propaganda will probably be more effective in reducing the rate of smoker recruitment than in stimulating smokers to quit or switch."
"The market share of health cigarettes increases rapidly for a brief period during each health scare and quickly stabilizes at a new and higher level of marketing penetration."
"Thus a new health cigarette entry could not rely on increased demand for health cigarettes, but would have to take its place at the expense of existing brands of health cigarettes..."
"Women, and particularly young women, would constitute the greatest potential market for a health cigarette."
"Advertising should be directed to both sexes but in such a way as to have the greater appeal to women."
"My recommendation is that we not introduce a new health cigarette unless there is another health scare or additional restrictive legislation is passed...."
"I have assumed that any health cigarette must compromise between health implications on the one hand and flavor and nicotine on the other. It seems clear from the performance of existing health cigarette entries that flavor and nicotine are both necessary to sell a cigarette. A cigarette that does not delivery nicotine cannot satisfy the habituated smker and cannot lead to habituation, and would therefore almost certainly fail. Health claims alone without flavor or nicotine cannot sell cigarettes--most smokers would rather quit than switch."
The Beginning Smoker
Persons under 25 years of age constitute over one-fourth of the total number of smokers. Of greater importance is the fact that this group will increase by about 18% between now and 1971...Any intensification of the anti-cigarette propaganda will almost certainly be aimed largely at this group. Indeed, there is evidence that the health scare has already had an effect on the rate of smoker recruitment and on the smoking habits of the under-25 group.
...Toacco flavor is absent or far down the lists of reasons given for beginning to smoke, so it should be theoretically possible for a health cigarette to satisfy the most common reasons (to be like friends, to feel or look older, to combat nervousness, to be rebellious). This is apparently not the case. Young smokers are the ones...least likely to smoke health cigarettes...
Apparently the reasons for beginning to smoke dictate the choice of brand as well, particularly for males. They appear to choose cigarettes that produce a proper image. Males under 25 are much more likely to smoke Winston, Marlboro and Lucky Strike...all of which project a male image...This suggests that there is something of a stigma attached to smoking health cigarettes and that a health cigarette would not be well received by young males.
Young females appear to be more willing to accept health filters, and for them the health filter may have more prestige value...With young women, it may be true that the fact of smoking is the major motivation and that a mild cigarette would be acceptable. Their willingness to accept health filters may increase now that the American Cancer Society purports to have found a relationship between smoking and health for women as well as men. This group could provide a market for a health cigarette.
- Company
- Philip Morris
- Author
- Johnston, Myron E., Jr. (PM Marketing researcher)
- Recipient
- Wakeham, Helmut R. R., Ph.D. (PM R&D VP)Vice President and Director of Research & Development, Philip Morris
- Seligman, Robert B. (PM VP of R&D c. 1976-82)
Vice President of Research and Development at Philip Morris Richmond, VA 1976-1982. Reported to Senior Vice President of Operations. In 1982 transferred to tobacco technology group. Wanted to share ammonia and other tobacco technology with PM International companies. - Seligman, Robert B. (PM VP of R&D c. 1976-82)
- Region
- United States
- Type
- Report
- Operation/Project
- Health cigarettes
- Subject
- health belief
- health claim
- target market
- Target/Women (Target Groups)
- safer cigarette
- health claim
Document Images
,I
Copy No.~~
Issued to,(). 9~11,,>
June 1966
I
Special' Report No. 248'
MARKET POTENTIAL OF~+ A,HEA~LTH CIGARETTE
CONFiDENTIAL
Joh
d v_:-;f~
W. L. Dunin, Jr.
Diis triibuti on
Dr. H. Wakeham (10)
Dr. R. B. Seligman
>
~v. F.
~ C O N T E N' T S
~
I. CON'CLUSION'S . . . . . . . . .
~
I
.......... 1
II. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . .. . . . , , , , , 3
I I I . AN!Al1Y S I'S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
I A. S&les Patterns . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
B. The Beginning Smoker . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
C. Potenti al Swi tchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
i
APPEND,IX
( EVIDENCE OF CONCERN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
(
I-
I
I. CONCLUSIONS
As a resul!t of the investigati'ons summarized in this report
I have reached the following conclusions:
1. A large proportion of smokers are conicernied about the
relationship of cigarette smoking to health (see Appendix).
2. The antt-cigarette propaganda will probably be more
effecti ve in reduciing, the rate of smoker recrui tment than
in stimullating smokers to quit or switch.
3. The market share of health cigarettes increases rapidly
for a birief period during, each health scare and q,uickly
stabilizes at a new and hiigher level of market penetration.
4. Thie Surgeon General's Report had markedly less effect on
the demand for health cigarettes than the first health scare
in the 1950's. Any future h1ealithiscares will probably have
even less effect.
5. Thus a new healith cigarette entry could not rely on increased
demand for heal'th cigarettes, but woulld have to take i'ts pilace
at the expense of existing birands of health ciigarettes. However,
6. the health cigarette market is characterized by low birand
l oyal ty, and shoulld be fai rly easy to, penetrate.
7. Women, and particularly young women, would constiitute the
greatest potential
market for a health cigarette.
1
~ ti
I
I
I
I
I
F
L
L
L
8. There is a growfng, willingness on the part of smokers,
particularly women, to accept nontobacco fliavor.
9. Mere red~ucti Qn in ni coti ne and TPM del ilveriies by conven.-
tilonal' methods of fi ltrati on would' not be a suiffi cilent basis
for launching a new cigarette, and, to attempt iit would~ be to
court disaster.
10. The illusion of filtration is as important as the fact of
filtration.
11. Therefore any entry should be by a radliically diifferent
method of filtration but need not be any more effective.
12. Advertiisinig should~be directed~to both sexes but in suich
a way as to have the greater appeal' tolwomen.
2
fT
I
fT
r
I
I
I
I
[
I
L
L
L
I
L
L
II. RECOMMENDATIONS
Our posture with regard to a health cigarette entry should'be determined by~ anticipated po:litical
and market co:nditi~ons.
All indlications are that 19&6 elections will resu1it iin a
Congress more sympathetic to business anid' less inclined than
the present Congress to pass restri c.ti ve legiiisl ati on.
My recommendation is that we not introduice a new health ciga-
rette unless there is anothier health scare or add'iti'onal
restrictive legislatiion iis plassed. In the event of another
health scare or restrictive llegislatilon our entry should be
determined~by the form of the scare or legisllation.
In the event of a resumption of the tar derby or the passage
of legislation requiring a statemenit of "tar" and nicotine
content on the pack, the de1ayedldilutioin cigarette could be
a formidable entry as a: full tobacco: flavored cilgarette. It
could:compare favorably with any heallth cigarette currently on
the market yet dleli ver ful l flavor throughout the cruci all fi rst
40 mm of the rod'. I am of the opini'on that we should press
development of this concept.
In the absence of legislation or a resumption of the tar derby,
LonigPar wouild probably be the best entry, since it is withiout
questi on a radi cal ly di fferent method of fi l'trati on and can be
made to gi ve the i l l usilon, of fi lltrati on wi thout i mpai ri ng the
tobacco flavor. It is a uniq,ue concept that could~catch on, but
would probably have trouble reachiing five billiioni in the absence
of another healithi scare. '
IL000338650
3
r
I
F
I
F
I
I
L
L
L
I
L
L
III. ANALYSIS
Avaiilabile evidence from surveys shows conclusively that smokers
are concerned about the relationship of cigarette smoking to
health but thiat they do not want to quit smoking. They are,
however, chaniging their smoking habits, generally toward higher
filtration,, even at the expense of a lioss of some tobaccolflavor.
That these chiang!es are health motivated is clear from the timiing
of the shiifts: The boom in filters came on the heels of the
first health scare, and the Surgeon General's Report stimulated
the shift to charcoal filters. The acceptance of inentholl cig&-
rettes ani6Lark indicates a willingness to accept niontobacco
flavor as a substitute for tobacco flavor. There is some evidence
that the antil-cigarette propaganda is more effective in reducing
the rate of smoker recruitment than in changing thie habits of
smokers.
It should be noted that thiiis report is an evaluation of th~e
market potential of a"healthier"' cigarette rather thian a"healthy"'
cigarette. If we couldidevelop a medically and golvernmentally
endorsed! "healthy" cigarette that tasted exactlly like a Marlboroi,
delivered the nicotine of a Marlboro, and was called Miarlbioro, it
wouild probably become the best selling brand. There is, of course,
.considerable doubt as to whether the medical profession and the
federal governmenit would ever endoirse any cigarette.
Since any health cigarette we might develop would have to compete
wi th the allleged "heal th ci garet.tes" now on the market, I have
accepted as a workinig definition, of a health cigarette the defi-
nition commonly used in the R'esearch Center: All cigarettes about
which health claiims have been made or implied~(charcoal filter
1000338651
4
cigarettes; Kent_and P'arliament; and minor brands such as Duke,
Life, Saino, and True). L & M is a borderline case: At one
time it was the major health cigarette enitry and iits sales
patterns are des.cribed in this report, but it is not iincl'uded
in the definition of health cigarettes. Similarly, Philip Morris
Menthol and Montclair are not included~inithis definition,,
although they could be considered health cig&rettes by virtue of
their charcoal filters. Since their comb:iined sales constiitute
only 0.6% of the total cigarette market, however, th,eiir inclusion
would in no way affect the anialysis.
I have assumedithiat any health cigarette must compromiise between
health implications on the one hand and flavor and nicotine on
the other. It seems cl!e&r from the perfoxmenice of exiisting
healthi cig,arette entriies that flavor and nicotine are both neces-
sary to sell a cigarette. A cigarette that d~oes not deliver
nicotine canniot satisfy the habituated smoker and~cannot lead to
habituation, and would therefore almost certainly faill. Health
claims alone without flavor or n1ilcotine cannot selll cigarettes-
most smokers would rather quite thaniswitch.
A. Sales Patterns
The health scare in the 1950's was accompanied by a decline in
ciigarette sailies (see Fig. 1), although the health scare was only
one of many reasons for thie decline. Of greater importance,
probably, were the end of the Korean War and the Accompanying:
recession, cigarette tax increases, and changes in the age compo-
sition of the population. The increase in sales of king-size
cigarettes during this period also contributed to the overall ~
decline in sales, siince fewer kiing-s.ize cigarettes are necessaryr
to proviide the same amount of tobacco. The health scare undoubtedly
1000338652
5
figure 1
CIGARETTE SALES BY TYPE, 1946-65
7
Health Filters (incl. menthol)
Other Filter (incl- menthol)
O
I I ( I I I I
1952 1954 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964
1966
fl
I
11,
was responsible f.or the rapid increase in filter cigarette
sal!es, and contributed to the riise in king-size cigarettes
(see Fig. 2). Apparently, however, the illusion of
filtration was more impoirtant than the fact of filtration,
and consumers were still' moist interested in flavor.
It is possible that the tar derby in the 1950's was a major
factor in arousing conicern over the _question of smoking and
health. L & M sales began a marked rise in 1955 after the
favorable coverage in Consumer Reports that year and received
an addi tiionall bolost fromiConsumer Reports in 1957. The most
spectacular performer in the 501's, of course, was Kent, which
iintroduced the "Micromite filter" in July 1957, immediately
after the rellease of the final report of the Ameri can, Cancer
Society study of smoking and hiealth, and received rave reviews
from Reader's Digest in Juily and August 1957 (see Fig. 3). It
seems more than mere co,inci dence that Parl i ament experilenced a
three-foilld increase in sales after favorable reports on thie new
filter iin both Reader"s Digest and Consumer Reports in early
1958. By 1959, smokers hiad apparently become inured to compet-
ing healthl clai'ms and to the health scare iin general. Duke of
Durham and Life were bothi colossal flops, in spite of favorable
reports iniboth Reader's Digest and Consumer Reports, and salles
of Kent*and L & M beg,an toidecline.
The hiealth scare in 1964 was undoubted'.ly the cause of the ci1ga-
rette sales decline, the accelerated shift to filters, and the
126% increase in sales of ch&rcoal filters. The indirect
approval gi ven Lark by the Su!rgeon General's offi ce pxob&bl)WA
helped all charcoial fi lters. Q -
O
7
~.
L..l
I
L
figure 2
SHARE OF MARKET
BY CIGARETTE TYPES
Regular
.....,_-) ,......_.,
12
1956
figure 3
SHARE OF MARKET-HEALTH CIGARETTES
All Health Cigarettes
1957
f,
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
(
U
f
;
t
I
L
L
Health scares seem to have the effect of disturbing sales
patterns after which the market adjusts to the di'stu!rbance
and settles down to a new, equi l i bri um. After the heal!thi
scare in the 1950's, sales of heal!thi cigarettes rose from
practically nothing in 1956 to niearly 12'% of the market by
late 1958. They maintai'ned that market share until early
1964, when the market share jumped abrupitly to sllig,htly lless
than 15% and stabilized at that levell. (See Figs. 2 anidl3.)
Curiously, the greatest l'osers among filter cigarette durinig
the recent health scare were the already establi'shied entries
in the hiealth cigarette market. Kent, L & M, and Parliament
all experienced declines in market share from 1962' to 1964,
while some full-flavor filter cigarettes (W'inston, Viceroy,
Raleiigh) were increasing market penetration anid'others (notably
Marlboro,), were holding thiei'r own. Even Pall Mall and Raleigh
nonifi lters mianiaged to increase thiei r market share from 19'63 to
1964. Switching patterns' shed some light upon thiis phenomenon.
Duriing this period Palll Mall lost smokers largely to regu!lar
and menthol fi l ters blut piiicked' upi smokers of regular ci garettes.
Winston, Viceroy, Raileig,h andl Marllboro lost smiokers to menthol
and health fil!ters, but gained even more smokers frominonfilter
brands. Health cigairettes, and particularly charcoal filter
cigarettes, cut very deeply into Kent anidl L& M.
All of this suggests that the h1ealth cigarette market becomes
relatively stable after a sustained period of exposure to a
given level of anti-cigarette propaganda. Thus th.e success of
a hiealth cigarette entry probably dle.pends partly on timing,. Kent,
Newport, Carlton, Lark, Tareyton, and our own entri'es were all
able to capi tal i ze oni the peri'ods of rapi d iincrease in the heal th
10a033S65'7
10
cigarette market, while other cigarettes were poorly timed and
notably unsuccessful. Toithe extent that suiccess depends on
timing!, the success or fai lure of a health ciigarette iis tiied
to the intensiity of anti-cigarette piropaganda, which is a
random vari abile and unpredi ctable.
B. The B'eginning Smolker
Persons under 25 years of age constiltute over one-fourth of the
total number of smokers. Of greater importance is the fact that
this group will increase by about 18% between niow and 1971. This
is over three tilmes thie rate of increase in the population aged
25 and over. Any intensification of the anti-cigarette propa-
ganda will, almost certainly be aimed Targely at this group.
Indeed, there is evidence that the health scare has already had
an effect on the rate of smoker recrui tmenit anid on, the smoki ng
habits of the under-25 group (see Item 13 in Appenidix).
It seems highly unlikely that the availability of a demonstrably
healthier cigarette would resu!lt in a chanige in the form of the
anti-cigarette propag,anda: It is d'iffiicult to conceive of the
propagiandists changinig their injunction from "Don't smokee" to
"If you must smoke, smoke a health cigarette." If the anti-
cigarette drive continues to have an effect oniyoung people, it
will pirobably be to diissuade them from smoking, altogether rathier
than to cause themito smoke health cigarettes.
Tobacco flavor is absent or far d'own i'n lists of reasons given,
for beginning to smoke, so it should be theoretically possible
for a healthi cigarette to, satisfy the most common reasons (to be
1000338658
11.
F
f
F
u
I
I
~
i
I
I-
t
,
L
like friends, t&feel or look older, to combat nervousness, to
be rebelliou!s),. This is apparently not the case. Young smokers
are the ones most wiilling to accept regular filters but least
likely to smoke health cigarettes (see Table I).
Apparently the reasons for begiinning to smoke dictate the choice
of brandas well, partilcularly for m'ales. Thiey appear to choose
cigarettes that project the proper image. Males under 25 are
much more liikely thani those over 25 to smoke W'instoni, Marllboro
and Lucky Strike (filter and nonfiilter)!, all of which project a
male image; and less likely than their elders to smoke Kent and
Lark, which are thought of (and indeed are), women's cigarettes.
Young males are a1so more likely to follow the crowd: The to~p
two brands among young malles (Winston and M'arllboro) together
account foir nearly 40% of thils market, while for other age groups
the market penetration of the top two, brands is less thian 22°a
except for those 55 and over. This tendency for young, smokers to,
sel!ect a brand to be like thei r friends was also:noted iin a
Nlovember 11961 study done for us by Opini1on Research Corporation.
In that study it was thiought that beginning smokers would seek
out a mild cigarette, since thie initia!l act of smoking, is designed
toisatisfy appearance rathier than taste. As noted above, however,
self-image extends to the choice of brand as wel'l. This suggests
that there iis somethinig of a stigma attachied to smoking health
ci g,arettes and that a heal th ci,garette woullid niot be wel l recei ved
by young males.
Young fema1es appear to be more wi lll i ng toiaccept heal th fiil ters ,
anid for them the health fiilter may have so~me prestige value. They
also are more willing to accept nointobacco flavors such as Lark
and mentholl birands. With young women
12
it may be true that the fact.
1000338659
TABLE I
CIGARETTE. TYPE PREFERENCES BY AGE AND SEX, 1965
Male
MenthoI Health Other
Age Nonfi lter Fillter Filter Filter
18-24 281`0 13% 6°0 5~300
25- 34, 37 16 13 3'5
35-44 36; 14 16 33
45- 54 39 11 18 32
55 and~ over 4:& 16 15 30
f
Fema] e
Menthol Hea1 th 0 t h e r
Age Nonfi'l ter Fi 1 ter Fi lter Fi lter
18-24 18°, 29% 19°0 34,°0
25-34 17 30 23 31
35-44 22 27 23 29
45 and over* 26 28 22 23
Source: 1965 HTP Report. Data from other sources show
essenti al'.ly the same patterm.
*Females 55 and over have been combined wiith those age 415-54
because of the small size of the sample. 1000338660
13
F
I
I
I
of smoking,is the major moti~vation and that a mild cigarette
would be a:cceptabilie. Their willingness to accept health filters
may inicrease now that the Ameri can Cancer Society plurports to
have founidi a relationshiiip between smoking and health foir women
as well as for men. This groupi could pirovide a market for a
heallth cigarette.
C. Potenitial Switchers
Since beginniing smokers do not constitute a particularly good
market fo:r a healtK cigarette, we must look to potentiall switchers
foir a market. As shown bel ow, the m,agni tu!d~e of swJitchi ng both
between and within cigarette types is d'.irectly related'i to the
intensity of the health scare:
% of All Smokers who Switched:
Periodl To a Different
Cigarette Type To a Different Branid
of the Same Type
Feb. 1957-Feb. 1958 21 10
Mar. 119518-Mar. 1959 17 6
J'une 1960-June 1961 11 7 1-6
O
Miar. 19612-Mar. 1963: 10 5 O
M~ay 1964-May 1965 17 10 CJ
C.J
~
Source: HTI Reports ~ -
It appears fromi these data and thiolse. ci ted above that thie effect-
of the health scares on present smokers is to loosen brand loyalty
and, cause smokers to shi ft back and forth between, brands and types
of cigarettes in proportion to the initensity of the anti-cigarette
14
F
I-
I
F
U
I
I
f
I
I-
I-
I
propaganda, wi th an overal l shift toward fi 1 ter cigarettes anid
nontobacco:flavoirs. Several studies have shown that a large
proportion of smokers believe that any filter reduces the health
hazard, and a much, smaller proportioni believe that chiarcoal
filters afford more protection.
Smokers seem, to be able to justify c6ntiniuing! to smoke whatever
type they happen to prefer: Nonfiliter smokers question the
efficacy of filters altogether; smokers of regular filters
questi oni the val!ue of charcoal fi lters; and smokers of charcolall
filters tendlto believe that charcoal filters are healthier.
As mentioned above, an effect of the health scare in the 1i9501's
w,asto i ncrease the market penetrati on of heaIth: ci g,arettesfrom
practi cal!ly nothi n~g i n 1956 to about 12% by 1 ate 1958', and the
release of the Surgeon General's Report was followed by an abrupt
increase to just under 151%. It is clear from these data and from
switching patternis thiat the shifts to! heallth, filters occur
concurrently wiithi heaTth scares, and further that the effect of
the first scare was much greater than the effect of the Surgeon
General's Report (see Figs. 2 and 3). On the basis of these data
we might reasonably expect that any future health scares will have
even less effect on sales of health filters.
Thus, indications are that hiealth cigarettes will maintain a fairly
constant share of the market even in the event of an initensification
of anti-smoking piropaganda. A new entry, therefore, woulid have to^
take its place at the expenise of existing heal'th filter brands. ~
This,, however, should not be particu.llarly difficult. Health ciga-
rette smokers seem to be an unusually fickle lot and there is a
consi derable amount of swi tchi nig among branid's on thei r part. Thi s
1000338662
15
F
f
I
I
I
I
I
probably results in part from the newness of the entries and the
low degree of b~ran~d loyalty, and in part from attempts of smokers
to~find a health cigarette with a satisfactory taste lievel. The
acceptan~ce of Lark, as well as menthol cigarettes, suggests that
nontobacco taste is acceptable to a segment of the market in lieu
of tobacco flavor.
The speed with! which charcoal filters penietrated the health ciga-
rette market shows the effectiveniess of a new concept. The public
had been conditioned to accept the filtering effects of charcoal
in other fields, and when charcoal was added to cigarette fillters
it proved tolb:e an effective advertisiing gimmick. The main
beniefi ciiary, of course, was Tareyton, whi ch was the fi rst entry in
the market.
16
r
F
(
F
I
I
f
I
. APPENDIX
EVIDENCE OF CONCERN
L
L
L
17
U
r
F
r.
I
I
I
I
i.
~
L
Summarized below, are some of the surveys concerned with public
reaction to the relationshiip between ciigarette smoking, and health.
1. Iin a 1955 Survey Reseairch Center survey of Anin Arbor, M,ichiigan,
hiallf of the smokers initerviewed sa1d they had changed thei r smok -
ing habits during the previous year. Of these, 40% said the change
resulted~ from the smokiing and cancer scare, but only 8% had stopped
sm~okiing.
2. A 1959 survey of 1talian smokers showed that 70% of smickers
believed filter tips to be less inurious to health than nionfilters,
but only abiout 10% smoked filters.
3. A study done for us in 1961 by Opinion Research Corporation
showed that smokers are concerned about the fact th&t th!ey smoke,
largely, because of the fear of a link between smokinig anid can!cer.,
Few, of the interviewees, however, had attempted to stop or plannedi
to do so.
4. In 1962, 1100 studenits in a New York City high school answered
a questionnaire after seeing a fiilim o~n smoking and health. Seventy-
fi ve pier cent reported that they smoked, and~ hal f of thie smokers
said they planned~to cut down or stop. In B'altim.ore, however,
after a year of i'ntensive anti-smoking p~ropaigan:d:a, students were
smoking az much as before, and more than studenits in
group,.
the conitroil
5. I!n 1963, the New, York Times reported' a study in which only 14% ~
of regular cigarette smokers considered the habi'lt "pleaisurabile,-
safe and worth the cost." Cigarette sales iin 1963 were up 2'.7%
f r o m 1962. 1000338665
18
F
I
U
6. In miid-1964, a survey in West Germany revealed that 98% of
the smokers queried had heard~ of thie U. S. Surgeon General's
Repiort. Siixty-three per cent believed it, ninety-two per cent
smoked as much as before, five pier cent smoked less, three per
cent smoked much less. In June 1964 cigarette sales reached an
all-time hiighi. Most cigarettes had llower nicotine and tar than
before the report. In the first quarter of 1965, cigarette sales
were 6% above 1964 and 17% above 1963. By early 1965 about 7%
of West German cigarettes were "free from niicotine and also mostly
free from tar."
7. Throughout Europe the proportion of filter tip! cigarettes
increased~from 1963' to 1964: From 80 to 82% in West Germany, 81
to, 84% i n Swiitzerl &nd , 42to, 47% i n, Bel gi um. Iin Sweden, fi l te r
tips increased from 17'io of the market in 1963 to 29°o in 19'65.
Increases in thie proportion of filters were also recorded in
Aius tri a and the Nethe rl an ds .
8. In late 1964 a Pubilic Health Service survey showed that "a
largie majority of the cigarette smokers surveyed indicatedl they
blelievedismoking to:be harmful." Eighity per cent of alll respond-
ents (and 70ro of smokers) thought a statement of tar and nilcotine
content should be req,uiired on; the pack. Siixty-nine pier cent of
all respondents thought ciigarettes caused lunig! cancer and'ninety
per cenit favored plublic education, on health hiazards of smoking.
At this time, according toi the Surgeon General, 18 million Americans
had sworn off ci garettes . "
9. Ini a January 1965 survey of 21~,0010 Pittsburgh students, 78% -of
high school students and 87'°0 of junior high students saidithe anti-
smoking propaganda they received in health classes was sufficient
to deter them from smoki ng. 1000338666
19
I
I
F
F
t",
I
I
I
~
~
I
L
10. In February 1965, Samuel' Lubell published the results of
initerviews wiith "a cross-section of randomly sel!ected smokers."
Slighitly more than half of the interviewees were sufficienitly
woirried that they tried to quit smokinig within, thie previous year.
Of thie remiainder, over half were convincedl that cigarettes are
harmful.
11. In February 19'66, when Lorillard was rumored to have developed~
a new and improved filter, their stock j,umped' ten poiints. When
the rumoir was denied, the stock lost only five points of the gain.
12. In May 1966, Luther Terry, former Surgeon General!, opinied that
18 mi l 1 i oniAmeri cans had qui t smoki ng i nithe 28' mon ths s i n ce the
Suirgeon General's Report. H'e also estimated thiat 4500 youngsters
begin smokiing every dlay. If this is true it means that 45-50% of
potentiial new smokers are smoking, and does not imply a significant
reduction in the rate of smoker recruitment. Curiously, 18'million
quitters was precisely the figure hie used a year and a half earlier
(see Item 8 above) and suggests either that the earlier estimate
was an exaggierationi or that no smokers have quiiit since late 1964.
13. In a:March 1965 survey done for Phiillip Morris by Elmo Roper,
on ly 14',% of the people who had tri ed new birandls of ciigarettes di d
so for health reasons. However, fewer people thian expected had
begun to smoke within, the previous year, and the proportion of 18-20
year-ol ds smoking fel l from 5~01i n 1963 to: 401% i n 19,65. Thi s
suggests that thie Surgeon General's Report is more effective in ^
reducing the rate of smoker recruitment thaniin stimulating, switch-
ing. Tha:t younger people are most s.usceptibile tolanti-smokiing
propaganid'a is suiggested by the pier cent of smokers iin each age group
who indicatedlthat they had! given up smoking for at least two weeks
d!uri ng the pirevi ous yea r:
1000338667"
~ 20
~
F
I-
I
I
I
Age %
18-201 4:2
21' - 2'4 45
25-34 30
35-49 24
50 and over 22
Total, all ages 28
That men are more susceptible than women iis suggested by thie per
cent of each sex who reported' that they smoke inithree successive
Roper stud4es:
% Who Smolke Cig!arettes:
Male Femiale
I 1960 512 32
1963' 5~0 35
I 1965, 47 36
While these year to year changes a:re noit statistically significant,
other sources, notably HTIi, show the same trend, and this trendl
bears watchiing.
In, the 1960 and 1965 studies smokers were asked to indicate whi,ch
of four statements best expressed thieiir feelings about ciigarettes
and cancer, wiithi the following results:
21
r
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
L
It didn't bother me at fi:rs,t but this
continuinig talk of ciigarettes arnd cancer
is begi'nn1ng to really worry me.
I t di dn' t bother me at fi rs t and thli s
continuing talk of cigarettes and cancer
still doesn't really worry me.
It di'd bothier me at first and this
coniti!nui ng talk of cig!a~rettes and cancer
is making me more woirried.
It d!id bother me a:t first, but this
conitinu!iing talk of cigarettes and cancer
doesn't seemitolbother me as much any moire.
Don't know or no answer
Total becoming,more worried
Total not worried! and less worried
March 1960 Marchi 1965
N=1036 N=1661
14% 10%
51 44
7
3
1:3
19 24
9 9
21 23
70 N
C
~
68
w
ci
ao
This impliied no signiiificant difference iniconicern. Q~
C~ -
Cd
Iit should' be noted, however,, that thiese q,uestiions were asked onily
of smoke,rs. If ex-smoke,rs had been included, th~eproportion
indicating concern would' undoiubtedly have been h:igher.
22
o
o
~
I
I
1
1
I
r
-
i
r.
o
u
1
~n
1
G W
O o
~Y.".i.o l 7~, ~. :2i
I
10003386'71
0
F
~
,
7
h
N
+:
.~
W
F-
O
---
