Tobacco Documents Online

the tobacco rod can be measured. A1'though in itself, the idea, to measure the two streams separately is scienti'fically very soundl, it is absolutely impossible to mimic normali smoking,with this device. Normal contact wilth the cigarette, one:of the most importantt factors in smoking, has become impossible. The instrument iis aa heavy glass instrument which prevents normal finger contact with the cigarette. Also, since the pores in the filter are at 131mmi from the mouth end a!nd •one of ' the rubber membranes has to be fitted' between mouth,and'po,res only 1'1-12'mm are left for insertion of the cigarette. This is not sufficient to alilow for normal smoking, because people will not want to touch the foreign object with thei!r lips. Although the normali insertionidepthiis 1'0-11 mm, the lips curve outwards above andibelow the place where they make contact withithe cigarette and thus at least 151mm should be allowed'to have the lips free from the instrument at normal average insertion depth. Even then, normal lip contact would'not take place, because people have difficulty handling the voluminous and heavy instrument withithe same precision as.a cigarette andi will therefore by very reluctant to put it to their mouth. Instead, they will bring their lips outward and will take only the very end of the filter between the softer iinner si'des~of the lip, which will fall partly over the roundlend of the filter. In this way the stream of air through the filter is blocked to a certain extent. This will be even more so, because the weight of'the instrument forces the person to put more lip pressure on the end'of the filter than normally. All these effects lead to a completely abnormal smoking situation, which has different effects on the results obtained with the instrument for different types of filters. For one type of filter, the so-called KActron filter, which allows the ventiliation, air into the mouth trough ventilation channels which are situated at the outside boundary of the filter, the results are changed dramatically. The reason is that the softer parts of the lips who are normally not in contact withithe end of the filter, are now closing off the ventillation holes, thus preventing the normal ventiliat,ion to take place. The results of' other types ot filters are less affected' bv the umnatwral wav of smoM1cim4 forced upon

the su!bject, because they'do not feed the ventilation air in the mouth through channels, but through the inner part of' the filter. This illustrates perfectly that creating unnatural smoking conditions may have differential effects on the results obtained for different types of cigarettes. Results obtained in this way have no relevance for normal smoking,behaviour.

References Koster, E.P. 1981. Sensory evaluation in the natural environment. . In: Proceedings of Flavour '81 (the third Weurman Symposium4 Munchen (P. Schreier, ed.)1, Walter de Gruyter, Berlini, p. 93-101. Koster, E.P. 1981. Time and frequency analysis: a new approach, to the measurement of some less-well knowniaspects of food preferences? In: Criteria of Food Acceptance {Ji. Solms and, R.L. Hallls eds.), Forster Verlag,AG/Forster Publishing Ltdi., Zurich, p. 240-2'51. Koster, E.P. 1983. Uses and!misuses of sensory analysis - psychologist'' point of view. In: J. Adda andl H'. Richards (eds.). International Symposium on,Food Flavors, Technique et Documentation (Lavoisier), Paris, pp. 129-137. Koster, E.P. 1985. Sensory analysis: aims, objections, constraints, possibilities. Proceedings of the EBC Symposium on @uality Assurance, Zoeterwoude, 12-1'4 novenber, 1984 (in press). E.P. Koster, 1985. A psychophysical study on the effectiveness of cigarette filters. CONFIDENTIAL unpublished preprint.

Vf'n 1'4 A+J'.,. c -fic Ali,:, fti.*&f4 Vo 4r Lcv r, .!