Outlines proposal for Project Less, aimed at reducing "total sidestream yield per cigarette to a level which gives a readily recognisable reduction in room odour and irritation, relative to leading market brands." Indicates that motivation behind project is consumer research on the "nuisance" of cigarette smoke and because "Government action to limit sidestream yields seems unlikely for at least 5 years because standard measurement methods have still to be agreed." Suggests that reduction in tobacco weight burned via circumference reduction is primary method.
Page 1: 17280053
NEW PROJECT PROPOSAL
Initiator: Mr. W.D.E. Irwin.
Reference: Special Sidestream meeting on 3.12.85 in Millbank.
Objective: General - To reduce total sidestream yield per cigarette
to a |~V6| which gives a readily recognisable reduction in room odour and
irritation, relative to leading market brands.
Significant reduction (99% confidence level) in
irritation and odour relative to target brands in
standard cubicle and room tests (the latter to be
2. Mainstream deliveries and puff ~umber to targets set
by individual market considerations.
3. Taste performance comparable to target brands as
measured by (a) Omega and (b) consumer tests.
Background: Attitude surveys continue to suggest an opportunity for
products which would alleviate .the nuisance of room cigarette smoke -
irritation, odour and haze. A second reason for developing low sidestream
products, Government action to limit sidestream yields seems unlikely
for at least 5 years because standard measurement methods have still to
A distinction is usually made between effects of the fresh
concentrated plume and those associated with its later dispersion around
a room (ambient smoke).
In the i)mlediate vicinity
Can be avoided
Plume visibility - yes
Odour/Irritation - no?
Everyone in the room
Cannot be avoided
Sum of brands smoked
Yield per cigarette
In sunBary, the primary social need is to reduce overall room
burden but in recent years there has been a concentration on reducing
plume visibi]ity for U.S.P. reasons.
BATCo document for Mayo Clinic 13 December 2001
Page 2: 17280054
Three theoretical options can be identified to improve sidestream
1. Qualitative changes to less objectionable components.
2. Quantitative reductions in yields.
3. Addition of odour masking agents.
Ecusta and De Mauduit papers have produced a qualitative change.
The same total sidestream is produced but a greater proportion is non
visible. The limitations are well known-- Haze is reduced but Irritation
and odour are not. Undesirable side effects include some distortion In
taste and biological properties. The cosmetic effect on plume visibility
has tended to dominate the need to reduce overall smoke burden. Other
qualitative routes, if discovered, may also lead to unpredictable side
effects. This statement is supported by the history of attempts at
selective mainstream modification.
Quantitative reduction in total sides~ream and, therefore,
smoke burden requires burning less tobacco to sidestream. This can be
done by a combination of lower tobacco weight and design changes (e.g.
slower burning papers) to mlnimise puff number reduction. Length, density
and circumference reductions have been used but circumference has the
least effect on puff number for a given weight reduction. This approach
• is being used in projects MISSILE and EEL.
Odour maskers may offer an additional benefit if they do not
affect mainstream. Suitable maskers have not been identified to-date but
In conclusion, the primary need is a reduction in total room
smoke burden and this can only be achieved by a reduction in tobacco
weight burned to sidestream.
Proposal: At constant density and length, 19n~ and 20m circumference
~garettes being developed for MISSILE (USB) and EEL (Virginia) respectively
give 40 and 35% weight reduction relative to a 24.75m circumference
standard. Puff numbers of 8 and higher have been obtained. These products
will be assessed against the sidestream performance targets noted earlier.
Depending on r~sults, developments may require further circumference,
density or rod length reduction. High levels of expanded tobacco in
combination with LTR slow burning sheets will be examined as an extension
of Project RUGBY. Later options will include the use of expanded extruded
tobacco with high inorganic contents, from Project DEER.
In general, the project will determine the weight reductions
required to meet the sidestream sensory target and, within this, optimise
combinations of dimensions, new filler material and new papers to achieve
the mainstream targets. Thus a developing series of new options will be
Meanwhile, it will be necessary for Marketing to explore methods
of communicating the message that such products continue to offer the
taste and satisfaction required by smokers whilst mlnimising room pollution.
The easier option based on the cosmetic reduction in plume visibility
must now be discarded because of unacceptable side effects and the absence
of a real consumer benefit.
BATCo document for Mayo Clinic 13 December 2001