Tobacco Documents Online

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, NEUCHATEL - QUARTERLY REPORT DIVISION . SUBJECT TITLE : QUALITY ASSURANCE + TECHNICAL SERVICES CIGARETTE AND SMOKE ANALYSIS PERIOD COVERED : WRITTEN BY JULY - SEPTEMBER 1988 Senehi F. (SEF), Hofer R. (RHO). KEYWORIDS Comparative, results, LGC, GB, Romann, Aubort, CH, SASO DATA FROM THE OFFICIAL UK LABORATORY (LGC), (see Appendix 1) A list was established showing the tar and smoke nicotine values of five PM brands analysed by LGC during al six-month period in 19B8, compared with the results obtained by QA-PME on parallel samples (Survey 27 covering: the period January - June 1988). The cigarettes were analysed by the two laboratorie s according to UK norms (',1 )~ (see Table 1, Appendix 1). For the brands Marlboro KS, Marlboro 10!0"s and Raffles 100's, the UK butt length is 1 mm more than the ISO butt length. For Marlboro; Lights KS and Marlboro Lights 100's, the UK butt length is 2 mm more thanithe ISO:butt length. Comments. 1. All our brands complied with the UK legislation. 2. The tar values found by LGC were comparable to those obtained by QA-PME, whereas the smoke nicotine values were higher and the CO values lower. 3. As mentioned in the previous quarterly report, the smoke nicotine results obtained by LGC in Survey 27, months January and February 1988, compared with Survey 26 (see Table 2, Appendix 1) , showed a trend towards an increase with all the manuifacturers. The situationi was back to normal in Survey 27' for month 5 (for all PM brands except Raffles) and for month, 6 (for all PM brands) (see Table 3', Appendix 1). It has to be mentioned that the present LGC laboratory is not air-conditioned and is subject to seasonal variation in temperature andlin % relative humidity which has anieffect on the analytical results. The LGC will move to a new smoking laboratory on November 14'., 198'8.

RESEARCH'AND:DEVELOPrSENT, NEUCHATEL - QUARTERLY REPORT 4. UK Legislation We have recently been informed by the representative of LGC'C that the new brands launched in the United Kingdom shouldinot containi more than 14.3 mg tar (previously 114.5 mgJ. This tar value which is now the maximum delivery allowed for new brands is based on a sales weighted average determined by LGC for the last 6 months (Survey 27) on all "Low to Middle" and "Middle" brands. COMPARATIVE RESULTS BETWEEN THE OFFICIAL CANTONAL LABORATORY OF ZURICH (DR ROMANN), THE OFFICIAL CANTONAL LABORATORY OF VAUD (DR AUBORT) AND QA-PME (see Appendix 2) A list was established showing the tar and smoke nicotine values of seventeen FTR brands analysed'.by Dr Romann and Dr Aubort, compared with the results obtained by QA-PME on parallel samples (2). The samples were taken at Onnens oniJuly 20, 1988. Comments 1. In comparison with the printed figures, all the values obtained by Dr Romann and Dr Aubort complied with the regulations. 2. In comNarison with the values obtainediby QA-PME, Dr Romann foundresults which were systematically lower =n tar and slightly higher, on average, in smoke nicotine. DEVIATIONS IN $ July August August October June 198'$' 1986 1985 198'4' 1984 No. of brands analysed 17 37 3'.7 36 35 Tar -9.3 -10.4 -15.3 -14.9 -8.6 Smoke nicotine +6.3 -7.4 -5.3 -1.9 -2.5 These lower values in tar and higher values in smoke nicotine may be due to the fact that Dr Romann uses a Filtrona 302 smoking machine (8 ports)' and that his laboratory air conditioning varies.

RESEARCH'AND DEVELOPMENT, NEUCHATEL - QUARTERLY REPORT 3. Inicomparison with the values obtained by QA-PME, Dr Aubort found results which1were systematically lower in;tar and comparable on average in smoke nicotine. DEVIATIONS IN % July September December P• 1~988 1'986 1983' 1982' No. of brandss analysed 17 37 6 12' Tar -7.2 -0.9 -4.4 -1.4 Smoke nicotine 0.0 -1.4 -3.1 -4.3' It has to be noted that: a) Dr Aubort is also using a Filtrorra 302 smoking machine (i8: ports) . b) The laboratory of Dr Aubort is not air-conditioned. c) The deviations in tar are particularly important for low delivery brands (below 8 mg) whereas there are d'efinitely less d.eviations with brands exceeding, 8 mg in~ tar. PROJECT S.A.S.O. A. OBJECTIVE The smoking laboratory in Riyadh has beeniinstalled but before SASO canistart working in good condition~s, fine tuning will have to be finalized. To be able to provide reliable results, SASO's chemists will need~ more trainina and more practice. B. STATUS The problems previously encountered with the HVAC'system are now resolved!. It is now possible to maintain the correct relative humidity and temperature values, as stipulated by ISO. Because of a lack of knowledge, SASO's chemists are not yet able to keep the laboratory equipment in good condition. This explains why they experience various minor problems delaying the real start of SASO'S testing,. We will support their efforts until they acquire a aood'level of self-confidence so that they cain guarantee credible results.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, NEUCHATEL - QUARTERLY REPORT C. PLANS 1. Organize practical cigarette smoking runs for SASO,`s chemists 2. Help SASO keep the equipment in optimal running condition. PRODUCT REPORTS Products reports were written for the following new brands: BRAND PRINTED VALU'ES N'1.ANUFACTURER'COUNTRY OF SALE' Cartier Santos LTK/F West KS/F Tar/SN = 13/1.1 Tar/'SN = 15/1.01 Rothmans Cinta Belgium Belgium Vog,ue 10OLF Tar/'SN 8/0.8 Rothmans France Vantage KS/F DPh4/SN 8/0.7 Reynolds Italy Capri 100'./F Tar/SN 9/0.8 B.A.T. The Netherlands Vogue~ 10~0~/~F Tar/SN 8/0.8 Rothmans The Netherlands Prince LS/'F DPrii/'SN/C0 = 18/1.5/14 Swedish, Tbbacco Sweden Prince Lights LS/F DPM/SN/CO:= Swedish Sweden 13/1.2/11 Tobacco Luckv Strike t-iild LS/F Winfield LS/F W.,infield Extra Light LS/F Berkel'ey Special KS/F Vogue 100/F REFERENCES Tar/SN = 8/0.7 Tar/SN = 14/1.1 Tar/SN = 5/0.5 B.h.T. Rothmans Rothmans Gallaher Rothmans Switzerland Switzerland Switzerland'! United Kingdom United Kingdom ~ ~ 1. Report by Senehi-F., dd. August 23, 198'8 N CZ 2. Report by Senehi-F., dd. September 21, 1988 ~ 3. Report by Hofer-R., dd. October 10, 1988 ~ 1

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, NEUCHATEL - QUARTERLY REPORT APPENDIX 1'. Table 1: COMPARATIVE RESULTS BETWEENILGC AND PME (Survey 27) Tar [mg,/cig] SN [mg,/'cig] CO [mg/cig]I LGC PME LGC' PME LGC PME Marlboro KS 13.18 12.93 1.02' 0. 91 12.97 13'.88'. Marlboro 100's 14.4:4 14.12 1.15 1.02 14.86 15.75 Raffles 100's 13.51 13.13 1.17 1.05 15.8'4' 15.97 Marlboro Lights KS 8.00 7.52 0.64 0.55 9.28 9.65 Marlboro Lights 100's 8.69 8.57 0.75 0.66 8.71 9.58 Average Surve~..~ 27 11.56 11.25 0.95 0.84 12.33 12.97 Average Survey 26 11.59 11.62 0.94 0'.84 12'.50 13.29 Averag,e Survey 25, 1!1.28 11.36 0.90 0'.81 12'.18 12.9'6 Table 2: BIAS (MANUFACTURER-LGC) FOR SMOKE NICOTINE [MG/CIG]i Imperial Gallaher B.A.T. Rothma7s PME Survev 26 (6 months) + 0. 0'7 + 0.0'7 - 0.05 - 0.04 - 0.10 Survey 27 (months 1 & 2) + 0. 02 + 0.03 - 0.11 - 0'.l'..0' - 0.13 Table 3 : BIAS (PM-LGC) FOR SMOKE NICOTINE [MG/CIG] ~ Survey ~ 2~7~ M~onths : 1 2 3~~ 4 5 6 ; © ~ All brands - 0 12' - 0 14 14 - 0 - 0 11 - 0 019 - 0 03 . . . . . . ~ ~ All brands exce t - 0 11 - 0 115 - 0 14 13' - U 07 - 0 - 0 013 p . Raffles . . . . . W L1 L1

COMPARATIVE RESULTS WITH THE OFFICIAL CANTONAL - LABORATORY OF ZURICH (DR. - ROMANN), THE OFFICIAL ;h ~ ~ C~ CANTONAL LABORATORY OF VAUD (DR. AUBORT) AND QA-PME ~ ~ n AR [mg/ciqJ moke nicotine [mg/cig] - _ x ~ z d trJ Brands Printed Roma nn Aubort QA-rME CIK Printed Romann Au b ort QA-PME CIR C values _ 6-771988 values __ _ _ 6-7/1988 - - C 0 ~i ~ ~ Muratti Extra 3 2.8 3.0 3.4 3.3 0.3 0.25 0.26 0.23 0.25 y Brunette N03 3 2.7 2.4 3.1 2.9 0.3 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.25 ~ Muratti Extra 100's 3 3.4 - 3.4 4.1 3.9 0.3 0.32 0 29 0 32 0 29 ~ _- . . . c~ Philip Morris Extra - 4 3.5 3.6 4.4 4.1 0.4 0 38 0 35 37 0 0 36 x . . . . 3y Philip Morris Extra 100's 5 4.3 3.7 4.8 4.8 0.4 0.42 0.37 0.41 0.43 y t~7 Brunette Extra 6 5.3 5.3 5.9 6.5 0.4 0.43 0.38 0.41 0.44 ~ Muratti 2000 6 5.5 6.0 6.3 - 6.5 - - 0.6 0.50 0.42 0.44 0.47 p Marlboro Lights Menthol 7 6.2 6.8 7.0 6 5 0 6 0 59 0 57 0 55 0 53 C ~' - . . . . _ _ - . . ~ Merit 8 7.4 6.9 7.8 7.7 0.6 0.61 0.54 0.58 0.56 ~ ~ Muratti KS 9 7.9 8.6 9.1 9.3 0.8 0.78 0 71 0 74 0 76 r' . . . ~ Marlboro Gold KS 9 8.3 8.2 8.7 9.0 0.7 0.72 0.69 0.65 0.67 ~ Marlboro Gold 100's 10 9.6 9.4 11.1 10.9 0.8 0.91 0.87 0.86 0.86 ~ isrtzna, tte Double F. 14 12.9 12.6 13.4 14.3 - 0.9 0.99 0.90 0.89 0.95 O ~ ~-3 ~ Marlboro KS 15 14.4 15.3 15.6 15.9 1.1 1.13 1.08 1.09 1.10 'b rrunettF Filtre 15 14.9 15.2 16.4 15.7 1.0 0.91 0.83 0.92 0.90 14 C1 Marlboro 100's 17 15.9 16.4 16.9 17.1 1.3 1.30 1.31 1 19 1 18 ~ Rrunette NF 19 16.8 18.3 18.4 17.1 1.2 1.06 1.04 . 1.05 . 1.03 JC w General Average 9.00 8.34 8.54 9.20 9.15 0.69 0.68 0.64 0.64 0.65 59~Sc9&z0z