Tobacco Documents Online

Topical Report NCI/S&HP/ORNL #51-A CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SMOKE FROM SECOND SET OF CERTAIN DOMESTIC COMMERCIAL LOW TAR AND NICOTINE CIGARETTES October 6, 1977 W. H. Griest, R. B. Quincy, A. H. Marshall and P. Mraz Tobacco Smoke Research Program Bio/Organic Analysis Section Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Interagency Agreement (ERDA-NIH/NCI) No. 40-485-74, Part I Internal (ORNL) Contract Charge Number 3390-0225 Intended for informal communication with project management only. Confidential until published or released by author:

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF SMOKE FROM SECOND SET OF CERTAIN DOMESTIC COMMERCIAL LOW TAR AND NICOTINE CIGARETTES W. H. Griest, R. B. Quincy, A. H. Marshall, and P. Mraz Introduction: This Topical Report contains analytical data for the mea- surement of tar, nicotine, CO, C02, HCN, NOx(as NO), and acrolein deliveries by a second set of domestic commercial low tar and nicotine cigarette brands, in response to a special NCI request. Experimental: The cigarette brands analyzed in this study were either purchased locally or provided by the manufacturer. Standard NCI protocol methods for handling, smoking, and analysis were employed. Each analysis was carried out in at least quadruplicate. Carlton 70's were not available for analysis. Results and Discussion: Table 1 contains the brand identifications, carton codes, and cigarette parameters for the brands examined in this study. The brands had either one of two distinct types of air-dilution filter holes in the tip. Decade (and menthol), L&M Flavor and Long Lights, Lark II, Real (and menthol) and Stride all had obvious air dilution holes arranged in a circumferential ring, while the remainder of the brands did not have any air dilution holes visible from the outside. These brands had instead two lengthwise rows of holes on the filter paper inner wrap. These holes did not extend through the outer wrap on the filter. Only one brand was repeated in this set from the first set of analyses (1), Kent Golden Lights. The present product was about 2% lighter in weight, but had a 20% greater RTD. The puff number was 5/ smaller. Analytical results presented in Tables 2 and 3 are expressed as delivery per cigarette, mean (mg) ± standard deviation (mg). Of this set of cigarettes, the most consistently low deliveries were by Stride. Several brands in the first set produced even lower deliveries of tar and nicotine, C0, and CO2, but Stride did have the consistently lowest deliveries of NOx, HCN, and acrolein. , Stride also appeared to kze the most uniform product in this set, and the standard deviations are among the lowest of the group. 11rJ. H. Griest, R. B. Quincy, and A. H. Marshall, "Chemical Analysis of Smoke from Certain Domestic Commercial Low Tar and Nicotine Cigarettes,°" Topical Report NCI/S&HP/ORNL No. 35, 12-1-76.

Our previous analysisi of Kent Golden Lights indicated 6.3 mg tar, 0.62 mg nicotine, 6.4 mg C0, 28.6 mg CO2, 74 ug HCN, 54.5 ug NOx (as NO), and 52.3 pg acrolein. Except for C0, and HCN to a lesser extent, there do not appear to be any great changes in the smoke chemistry of this later production batch. Comparative data are scarce. Table 4 contains tar and nicotine data found in commercial advertising; these are either quoted from FTC lists or generated by FTC methods. Our data are in good agreement with these data, considering the uncertainties in comparing different manufacturing batches of any given brand. Comments: It should be emphasized that some of these products may represent early production batches, and later batches may yield somewhat different deliveries. Similar differences may exist for different production batches of other brands.

TABLE 1 Cigarette and Brand Description Brand Carton Code Cigarette Wgt., mg Cigarette RTD, mm H20 Puff Number Decade G76 901 91.4 8.1 Decade Menthol G72 890 101.3 8.1 Kent Golden Lightsa H 935 99.7 8.0 Kent Golden Lights Menthola H 918 90.2 7.3 Kent Golden Lights Deluxe 100'sa H 1084 113.3 9.1 Kent Golden Lights Menthol 100'sa H 1073 112.6 8.9 L&M Flavor Lights (King) H7 12 895 97.6 8.2 L&M Long Lights (100's) E7 34 1034 100 9.7 Lark II E72 837 89.7 8.2 Newport Lights Menthola W 929 103.4 8.1 Old Gold Lightsa W 921 91.6 7.3 Real ETG 935 113.9 8.1 Real Menthol FVG 908 106.6 8.1 Stride (Sample 83A) K77 975 76.2 8.4 aAir dilution holes arranged lengthwise on inner paper wrap of filter. Other brands had circumferential rings of air dilution holes.

TABLE 2 Tar, Nicotine, C0, and C02 Deliveries Delivery per Cigarette, Mean (mg) ± Std. Deviation (mg) Brand Decade Decade Menthol Kent Golden Lights Kent Golden Lights Menthol Kent Golden Lights Deluxe 100's . Kent Golden Lights Menthol 100's L&M Flavor Lights (King) L&M Long Lights (100's) Lark II Newport Lights Menthol Old Gold Lights Real Real Menthol Stride Tar, mg Nicotine, mg CO, mg C02, mg 5.5 ± 0.45 0.46 ± 0.04 4.3 ± 0.29 19.2 ± 0.89 6.6 ± 0.15 0.69 ± 0.02 4.4 ± 0.11 21.8 ± 0.30 8.9 ± 0.25 0.71 ± 0.01 9.2 ± 0.26 34.4 ± 0.09 8.3 ± 0.20 0.66 ± 0.01 8,3 ± 0.11 30.1 ± 0.14 11.6 ± 0.12 0.97 ± 0.03 11.0 ± 0.20 40.8 ± 0.27 10.5 ± 0.05 1.00 ± 0.02 11.9 ± .08 41.2 ± 0.09 7.2 ± 0.33 0.80 ± 0.10 4.8 ± 0.11 22.3 ± 0.26 6.5 ± 0.27 0.67 ± 0.08 5.5 ± 0.63 22.8 ± 1.60 7.5 ± 0.09 0.61 ± 0.01 7.3 ± .08 29.7 ± 0.51 10.3 ± 0.40 0.85 ± 0.08 12.5 ± .40 38.0 ± 1.35 11.5 ± 0.5 0.96 ± 0.03 12.5 ± 1.18 37.3 ± 2.75 10.2 ± 0.26 1.01 f 0.06 12.9 ± 0.22 40.7 ± 0.38 7.9 ± 0.43 0.81 ± 0.06 10.2 ± 0.47 29.6 ± 0.73 3.3 ± 0.07 0.36 ± 0.01 1.8 ± 0.05 11.6 ± 0.11 6194cf,63

TABLE 3 HCN, NOx (as NO), and Acrolein Deliveries Brand Decade Decade Menthol Kent Golden Lights Kent Golden Lights Menthol Kent Golden Lights Deluxe 100's . Kent Golden Lights Menthol 100's L&M Flavor Lights (King) L&M Long Lights (100's) Lark II Newport Lights Menthol Old Gold Lights Real Real Menthol Stri de Delivery per Cigarette, Mean (pg) ± Std. Deviation (pg) HCN, pg NOx (as NO), -p.g Acrolein, pg 48.5 ± 7.5 57.0 ± 6.2 37.7 ± 6.4 50.4 ± 5.5 61.2 ± 6.2 46.8 ± 1.1 50.9 ± 2.7 60.8 ± 4.4 47.2 ± 3.5 62.1 ± 7.1 71.4 ± 2.3 37.0 ± 3.3 62.2 ± 6.2 83.2 ± 3.8 48.2 ± 2.5 70.4 ± 5.8 83.0 ± 8.8 56.8 T 1.0 64.9 ± 8.1 40.2 ± 7.8 29.6 ± 4.5 68.9 ± 5.7 40.8 ± 5.8 46.8 ± 4.4 84.2 ±14.3 82.7 ±14.2 44.2 ± 0.96 133. ±12.6 85.9 ± 6.0 56.5 ± 5.2 118. ± 8.6 108. ± 7.3 58.2 ± 2.1 155. ± 5.7 98.9 ± 7.2 75.5 ± 4.1 105. ± 8.2 83.8 ±11.3 44.0 ± 3.5 <10 5.3 ± 0.8 11.8 ± 0.5 0Z9&m6q

TABLE 4 FTC or "FTC Method" Data from Commercial Advertising Brand Tar, m Nicotine, my Kent Golden Lights 8 0.6 Kent Golden Lights Menthol 8 0.7 Kent Golden Lights 100's 10 0.9 Kent Golden Lights Menthol 100's 10 0.9 L&M Flavor Lights 8 L&M Long Lights 8 Real 9 0.8 Real Menthol 9 0.8