Tobacco Documents Online

2021574731 n > N I H M k ~ N ~ J O 0 •1 :3 0 a •1 :1 fY ~ 3 1 •1 41 ~1 +1 9 Y n ~ a a ~ ? +1 •1 +1 +1 M e~ s a ~ a .d N . I , INIIAI.A'1'ION ANU AIISOUI'fWN UI:TUIIA('6O SAIOKI! 191 Ikriud of Ihe sluily. No changes In bull Icnglh ur cisarclle cunsumpllun wcrc nulcd. lu'fable 14.5 aro shown (lie resulls of subjects In Grolip U who clccleJ to rcmain uu law klr pruducls. There slre no significanl dli'fercnces fur any paramcler betwecn dle second and third smoking periods when subjects were on Ihe low Iar pruduct. As in Gnrup A Ihe nlcullnc cumpcnsaliun ratiu Is slgnificanlly higher afler switehing to 1he low lar pruduct, suggesting sulno attempt to cuntkns•,dc but again, as shown by Ihe niculinc dose, this compensation Is not complete. As before puff volumc would appear to be an Important faclor In compensation and there arc no significant fhanges III hUll length or cigaretle cotlstlnlptillll: . . This study would conf)nn other reports In that chanRss In smoking parameters are demonstrable when subjects twlldr to products ht a different tar group • there is sonsc attempt 19 malntaln ibe'dusc' uf smoke at a constant level. IrrlmlaNon ' In addition to the above study we have had the opportunity of looking al (lie Inhalation pallern In one subject smoking products from different tOr groups. The subject is a habitual middle tar smoker and measuroments of carbon monoxide Irscrelnent and smoke exposure Index were made on two consecutive days whllst he smoked his normal brand of cigarette. The results are shown In Fig. 14.13 where It can be seen that there Is good agreement between the two sets of observations. x Middle tar product AHlgh tar product • Low tar product 0.001 , , , , t 10 70 30 10 SO 60 10 Ao 90 EXPOSURE INOEX /lllre sec) FIg. 14.13 The ralallonshlp between the Increment In al.eolar cerbon ,nonoxlJe parlld pressure and Ihe smoke expusure Indox for a habitual mlJJle te -Aer moking his normal product (x), and low ler produol (ek) and a hlgh In lucI (L~. t~or comparlson tho llnear roprcaslon Ihwr uf inlJJle and tow rar sinokcr% are slwwn. ^

SMOKING BFlIIAV1OUR r 1 a third occasion the subjcct was given a low tar produc/ to smoke and,'as -' ;.atcd, there was an Increase in exposure Index with a m~rginal fall In carbon oxide Increnscnl. This result pauallcls lhe results oblained from the measurements noking parameters outlined above and might suggest an attempted compensation. Icsults are also in agreement wilh the previously defined relationships of carbon oxidc increment and exposure index for the different product groups. s another occasion the subject was given a high lar product to smoke. In this uiun the results, as shown, are not as one wight have expected; Ihe exposure x decreased as one might have predicted but 1he carbon monoxide Increment cpecledly showed a dramatic faU. Furthermore, considering tlse carbon monoxide I of the product, the rise in alveolar carbon monoxide was well below that which would have prcdictcd frum the carbon monoxide Incrcnscnt • expusure Index :iunships as prcviously discussed. Observatibn uf the chest pncumogram tracing rcd a: planation for this discrepancy lit that Ihe pattern obscrvcd was that iunstrated In example 2 of Fig. 14.7 witls an apparent active exhalation prior to first inlsalation following the puff. The only other time that this pattern has i observed was In one habitual high tar smoker who has been studied and he .istently showed this feature In his smoking. se reason for this unusual pattern of smoking must be In terms of an organoleptic onse, a topic which has been little discussed In relation to smoking belsavlour, middle tar habitual smoker switching to the high tar product commented spon- rously on the taste and suengtls of the cigarette such that he found It difficult Mhalc. Such organolepllc faclors may however nut only be relevant when con• ' ring the changes in smoking pattern on switching to or smoking a product In a Icr tar category but may also be Important, In conlributing to the changing Irsseters observed, when switching to a lower tar product. If middle tar smokers asked to conunenl when given a low tar pioduct they frequently Indkate the Jucls so be unsatisfactory In terms of their strength and taste. , Ic1usU Isis paper, we have attempted to outline some of the available techniques for the ~ O tysis of smoking parameters and cigarette smoke absorption, and described their licaliun lit a wide ranging series of studies. N'c may auempt to suuunarise Ilse act of smoking In terms of tise parameters MA• 1 f 11 1 t I usscr us u y,tv= ~ .~T)aeeJi.no.cot~q!!. ~.,, P, egn i ose,o ,n~..,~o. ,Pi4~9nS9~.to,the`'`1 Rill Iker (fstlnl,alS~from~, ~u~t nlcoi„l~ne,~~t{+notys~s~iij ~l 1 ~ r~ts)tn~9~,a!I!Qk4+llbbd~ ~, I _hc sn19k4~lIl4~!e~,YY~ ~lrl=olar:oarb.oswwrlonldoaevela)d~l ~.~ lhcrc Is a signlFlcunt curreiatbn betwecn llte amount of smoke absorbed by w smukcr and Ihe smoke expusure Index derived from the volume and tlrsse periods N r4alatiuns following tlte puffing of a cigarcuc. vill tlsus be rculiscd Ihut the 'dose' of tobacco smoke absorbed by the subject (s s;wply the product of the'duse' of smoke presented to the smoker and the ake .xpusure. P -r Il Is equal to the product of the'dose' of smoke Inhaled ~ . wherc thc'duse' Inhaled tends to be a c unslanl and represents I thc'xwukc cxi>:. ~. . .. '..Vtu•' il1'.nllikc nl9Acnacd tn Ihc amI)kcr madillcd by Jictors which are prsl clcarly INIIALATION AND AOSORPf1ON OF TOOACCO SMOKE 193 "With regard to differences In the act of srsioking between smokers of different ' product types we have secn that for habitual smokers of middle and low Iar products there are no demonstrable differences and the dose of cigarette smoke presented to a smoker is dependent upon the-cigarette speciflcalion. Differences In absorption of smoke Inhaled are dependent upon the pattern of Inhalalion but for any given Inhalation pattern differences In smoke absopition are again dependent upon Ihe cigarette specification. In switching studies there Is some evidence that subjects adjust their smoking to maintain a constant 'dose' of cigarette smoke but, whilst this may be true, the possibility of changes due to organoleptic factors has not been ruled out. Whatever tlse cause of the observed modifications to the smoking profile It would be hnportant to ascertain whether these persist or arc relatively short Ilvcd. The broad approach to the analysis of smoking taken lit this paper has perhaps challenged some widely held concepts and certainly raised a large number of questions which will require further study. One overriding questlon, however, which must be posed is whether this type of study can be Justifled at all? The answer must be'yci for lhe current yardsticks available for measuring success In providing a low risk product are smoke chemistry screening and the results of blo•tesUng lit animals, based on standard smoking parameters. As we have seen the smoker can and may modify these paramelers and hence nsodlfy IJte quality and/or tlle quantity of smoke when smoking a particular product. \Ve need to know tlse extent of such modifications In order to Ntempt, in lhe short term, to predict long term morbidity response rather than awail the results of long term epidemlological studies. In any evenl. In tite final analysis, tise yardstick for Judgirig lhe relative risk factor of different smoking products must be the human response. Acknowledgement - We thank Professor A. Guz, DePar(men (yi clne. Charing Cross ilospltal Medical School for providing facilitics for technique development. We are graleful to the f±•ditor of Clinical Science and Molecular Medicine for his permission to publish Fig. 14.8 and Fig. 14.9. 1 t References Adams, P.l.. (1966) Measurements on puffs taken by human smokers. 20th Tobacco ClrenrlNS Reiearch Conference. Wlnston•Salem, N.C. Armitage, A.K, (1973) Some recent observations relating to the absorption of nlcutine from tobacco smoke. InSnwkbld4clmvfour: Motives and Irrcenrivet, cd. Dunn. W.L. pp. 83•92. Washington: V.11. Winston lc Sons. Ashton, I1. & Watson, D.W. (1970) Puf(ing frequency and nicotine Intake In clgaretle smokers. British Medical Juurnal, 3, 679-681. Comer, A.K. & Creighton, D.L. (1978) Thc cffect of exrerhnental condillons on smoking behaviour, 77rtt vulunre. ~ r