Jump to:

Philip Morris

Tar and Nicotine Contents in the Smoke of 44 Brands of Shag Tobacco

Date: 1989 (est.)
Length: 35 pages
2501209818-2501209852
Jump To Images
snapshot_pm 2501209818-2501209852

Fields

Author
Besamuscafaay, E.W.
Dekok, A.
Vreeker, C.P.
Area
BADSTUBER,ANDRE/OFFICE
Type
REPT, REPORT, OTHER
BIBL, BIBLIOGRAPHY
CHAR, CHART, GRAPH, TABLE, MAPS
Attachment
2501209817/2501209852
Request
Stmn/R2-038
Named Organization
Dutch Standards Inst
Ed Laurens
Filtrona Instruments
Heupink En Reinders
Karl Fisher
Ministry of Welfare Health + Cultural Af
Niemeijer
Reemtsma
Turmac
Van Nelle
Verkoopcentrale Van Labaksprodukten Holl
Wilrijk
Bulletin Fedetab
Douwe Egherts
Document File
2501209800/2501209853/Meta - Ryo - C.E.C.C.M.
Named Person
Allman
Bell
Rickert
Author (Organization)
Government Testing Station for Products
Tobacco Section
Master ID
2501209817/9852

Related Documents:
Litigation
Stmn/Produced
Characteristic
MARG, MARGINALIA
Site
E16
Date Loaded
05 Jun 1998
Brand
Drum
Mascotte
Matrozen
Rizla Blue
Rizla Red
Rouge
Samson
Van Nelle
UCSF Legacy ID
ukb29e00

Document Images

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size:

Page 1: ukb29e00
t t TAR AND NICOTINE CONTENTS IN THE SMOKE OF 44 BRANDS OF SHAG TOBACCO Dr. A. de Kok E.W. Besamusca-Faay C.P. Vreeker Rijkskeuringsdienst van Waren Alkmaar (Government Testing Station for Products, Alkmaar) Tobacco Section Report No. AL 870901
Page 2: ukb29e00
Contents 1. Summary 2. Introduction 3. Methods s , 3.1 Sampling 3.2 Determination of the water content 3.3 Hand-rolling cigarettes 3.4 Smoking of the hand-rolled cigarettes 3.5 Determination of the tar and nicotine contents 4. gesults and discussion Page 4.1 Measurements under standard conditions 4.2 Variation of different parameters when hand-rolling cigare#.tes. 4.2.1 Type of cigarette paper 4.2.2 Conditioning and tobacco weight 4.3 Relationship between nicotine in the tobacco and in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes 4.4 Comparison with similar research 5. Conclusions 6. References © 0 ~O
Page 3: ukb29e00
3 snaa ~ooa ana nicotine contienL an Tne smoxe o= 4~ oranas 01 3.. Summary The present report describes a method which can be used to determine the tar and nicotine contents in cigarettes which have been rolled from shag tobacco. A total of 44 brands of shaa on sale in the Netherlands have been investigated using the method described. Despite the fact that it is impossible to make a direct comparison between cigarettes and shag, it can be stated that the measured tar and nicotine contents of shag are considerably higher than those of ordinary factory-made cigarettes. The spread between the different brands and types is greater as regards nicotine content than as regards tar content. The terms such as mild or light, medium and strong which are widely used to describe different types of shag are critically examined in the light of the results obtained. Finally, for reference purposes, an investigation has also been carried out into the influence which factors such as the different sorts of cigarette paper, the conditioning conditions of the tobacco and the amount of tobacco used per cigarette can have on the ultimate tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of the rolled cigarettes.
Page 4: ukb29e00
4 2. Tntrodccti on In accordance with the Order relating to cigarettes and shag (Decree of 29 April 1981, Staatsblad 329), packaging containing cigarettes intended or suitable for supply to a consumer must indicate the following: a. "Smoking can damage your health" Minister for Health and Environmental Hygiene". b. 1. The nicotine content, denoted by the word "nicotine", in tenths of milligrammes per cigarette. 2. The tar content, denoted by the word "tar", in milligrammes per cigarette. For ahag., on the other hand, only the obligatory statement as given under a. is applicable, i.e. no indication of the tar andJor nicotine contents is required. The reason for this is that, in contrast to cigarettes, there is still no standard method for the rolling of hand-rolled cigarettes and the subsequent smoking of these cigarettes using a standardised method. The smoking of machine-made cigarettes for the purpose of collecting the smoke condensate and then determining the tar and nicotine contents is carried out in accordance with NEN standard 3382. It is, of course, possible for hand-rolled cigarettes to be smoke-tested according to the same standard. The only problem remaining is how standardised cigarettes can best be rolled`from shag. In the present investigation an attempt has been made to find a suitable answer to this problem and, in so doing, give an initial impetus to the development of a standardised method for the determination of tar and nicotine in the smoke of cigarettes made from shag. The incongruity between cigarettes and shag as regards the obligation to state the tar and nicotine contents on the packaging has already been pointed out by, among others, the cigarette industry and the Ministry of Welfare, Health and Cultural Affairs. Since the shag industry has not yet developed a standard method, as has been done in the meantime by the cigarette industry within- a standards committee of the NNI (the Dutch standards institute), the tobacco section of the Rijkskeuringsdienst van Waren Alkmaar (the Government testing station for products at Alkmaar) was asked from many sides to undertake an exploratory investigation into the possibilities of determining the tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes. The method finally chosen was applied to 44 brands and types of shag available on the Dutch 1 From 1 September 1987 the new text on all packets of cigarettes and shag shall.be: "Smoking damages health. It can cause lung cancer and heart problems. Royal Decree 29 April 1981. Staatsblad 329". 2501209821
Page 5: ukb29e00
Tabel 1. Verkoopcijfers van sigaretten en shag en relatieve marktaandelen in Nederland over de periode 1980 - 1985. [Bron: Bulletin Fedetab, 9119861 Jaar Verkoopaantal Marktaandeel (in miljoenen stuks) Sigaretten Shag Sigaretten $ha8 1980 22.975 14.669 61,0% 39,0% 1981 21.189 15.543 57,7% 42,3% 1982 22.127 15.737 58,4% 41,6% 1983 23.113 18.073 56,1% 43,9% 1984 16.032 18.337 46,6% 53,4% 1985 16.289 18.407 46,9% 53,1% .4 5
Page 6: ukb29e00
5 market. r Finally, it is useful here as an illustration to examine the relationship between the sales of cigarettes and shag in the period 1980-1985. This data is reproduced in Table 1. It will be clear that the sales show a substantial shift from cigarettes towards shag. Without going further into the reasons for this phenomenon, it may be said that in the last few years the sales of shag have overtaken those of cigarettes. There is therefore sufficient justification for removing the discrimination between cigarettes and shag. Table 1 anu a~ a'" shares in the Netherlands in the period 1980 - 1985 (Source: Bulletin Fedetab. 9/1986) Year 5al.,~s. (in millions of units) Market share Cigarettes Sliag Cigarettes SILa,g, m-d
Page 7: ukb29e00
6 ! 3. Methods 3.1 Samplinj~c Samples of the 44 brands were acquired from various tobacconists and supermarkets in the period July/August 1986. Five packaging units (usually 50 grammes, sometimes 200 grammes) were obtained for each brand. The samples were packed in plastic bags, sealed and transferred after sampling direct to the laboratory where they were kept in the closed packaging until the cigarettes were to be rolled. 3.2 Determination of the water content After the seal was broken, just before the cigarettes were rolled from the tobacco, a sample of each brand was taken for the purpose of determining the water content at the moment the pack was opened. The water content was determined by two independent methods, namely the drying stove method and the Karl Fischer method. Using the drying stove method the weight loss was measured after ~. ,gr' a~nme)of tobacco had been ~iea~et~`~ or,41~. . rs-:_at Using ih 'r~ Fischer method 1 gammo ~~'t~bacco was;ra~s'cirbed _in 1Q~-.t~ methanQ.~ in an Erlenmeyerwhich was . Pn '~~` ~'` ~`' ' put aside ' fc~r a in~riirr~iuin of 24 hours. The water content in the methanol extract was then determined (after correction for the blank) and calculated back to the content in the tobacco. 3.3 Hand rolling cigarettes from shag was taken from the different packages and cigarettes were The standard ~.,..~_ . . ,.:.,~V ~ ,w.~.._-...~._ . . use wa~ # ~ ength 70 mm { WilriW jk, ~e~~tr}~~i ~~s of which w i re "`•d aine rom the s hops at the s ame . ; ~., ... ~_ time as the tobacco. The 41 i~~~nt 'ttabaidca'.:iiser3,_ for:., eaah ~~~ga~€~tte stas* `~0- on i $cig~m~m"e~ F~alance. Af~er f~e arettes had been rolled they were weighed again. Cigarettes which had lost more than 5% in tobacco weight as the result of rolling were not used for the smoke analysis. Cigarettes which had a diameter outside the range 7.8 - 8.1 mm were also omitted. After being rolled, the cigarettes were conditioned for 48 hours at 60% relative humidity and 22°C, the standard conditions which are normally also used in the standard method for factory-made cigarettes. The hand-rolled cigarettes were kept in these conditions aintil they were smoked in the same conditioned room. A sample of tobacco was also taken from the conditioned hand- rolled cigarettes for the purpose of determining the water content at the moment of smoking. 25a1209824
Page 8: ukb29e00
7 3.4 Smoking of the hand-rolled cigarettes The rolled cigarettes were smoked on a 20-channel (Borgwaldt manufacture, type RM/CS), Iargely , in NEN standard 3382. ~ ~~~i:: ~_ 3itie,o~<'_~ ==~g~ a ~ Wi th a a~ , `.~:- ° ~. ....w~.3=-= of 35 ml and a drawing frequenc o~ ~„4~draw/miniite Y were smoked down to a fixed butt length of 23 mm. of tobacco the smoke condensate in one smoking cigarettes was collected 92 mm). Two smoking on a fibreglass were a smoking machine accordance with drawing volume the cigarettes For each brand session of 10 filter (cross-section carried out for each brand so sessions that finally two independent contents were obtained. values of the tar and nicotine 3.5 Determination of the tar and nicotine contents The fibreglass filters on which the smoke condensate was collected were weighed before and after a smoking session by means of an analytical balance. The difference in weight corresponds to the so-called "raw smoke condensate" (per 10 cigarettes). The fibreglass filters were then transferred to an Erlenmeyer flask after which 100 ml methanol was added. The Erlenmeyer flask was left to stand for 16 hours during which time the smoke condensate was extracted from the filter into the methanol. The water content in the methanol extract was determined using the Karl Fischer method and the nicotine content was determined by means of gas chromatography. The gas-chromatographic conditions for the determination of nicotine are given in Table 2.' Table 2. GC conditions for the determination of nicotine Apparatus: Column: Stationary phase: Carrier gas flow rate: Oven temperature : Injector temperature: Detector: Detector temperature: Detector gas flow rates: Nicotine retention time: Varian 3700 with autosampler 1.8 m x 2 mm i.d. glass column 10% Carbowax 20M on Volaspher A-4 80/100 30 ml min-; (preliminary pressure: 24 psi) 150'C 210°C FID 270°C air, 300 ml min-1 hydrogen, 30 ml min-; 6.2 min. An example of a gas chromatogram of a smoke condensate extract is shown in Fig.1. The nicotine peak can be clearly seen. 2501209825 Fig. 1. Gas chromatogram of a methanol extract of the smoke condensate of a hand-rolled cigarette.
Page 9: ukb29e00
9, Resultater: en discussie. 4.1 ,tfetirrgen onder standaardcondtlies. In Tabel 3a zijn de teer- en nicotinegehalten (in mg per sigaret) weergegeven van de 44 onderzochte merken en typen shagsigaretten, waarbij een onderverdeling gemaakt is in de verschillende typen shag, namelijk zwaar, halfzwaar, mild of licht en de overige soorten (zoals bijvoorbeeld American blend, Virginia tabak en "sigaretten"shag). Tevens is de ver- houding teer/nicotine, alsmede het gemiddelde trekgetal (het aantal trekken per sigaret) ti jdens de rookanalyses in de tabel opgenomen. Elke waarde in de tabel is het gemiddelde van twee onafhankelijke rookbeurten. Voor de overzichteiijkheid zijn de duplowaarden niet in de tabel opgenomen. De verschillen tussen de duplowaarden waren echter nooit groter dan 7,8% voor het nicotinegehalte, respectievelijk 7,6% voor het teergehalte. In de meeste gevai- len bleven de duplo's zelfs ruim binnen de 5%. Dit gegeven plus het feit dat de duplowaar- den van het trekgetal ook nooit meer dan 10% verschilden, geeft aan dat de gevolgde proce- dure, vanaf het moment van rollen van de shagsigaretten tot en met de uiteindelijke water- en nicotinemetingen, een zeer aanvaardbare reproduceerbaarheid heeft. Ter illustratie worden in Tabel 4 nog eens de resultaten weergegeven van een meting in viervoud van Drum excellent halfzwaar. Hieruit blijkt ook overduidelijk de opvallend goede reproduceerbaarheid van de methode. Tabe! 4. Reproduceerbaarheid van de procedure voor het bepalen van leer- en nicotine in van shag gerolde sigaretten. Merk Teer Nicotine Trekgetal (mg/sig) (mg/sig) Drum excellent halfzwaar 27,7 2,14 11,5 28,4 2,15 10,9 28,7 2,12 11,8 a 28,1 2,08 11,5 Gemiddeide 28,2 2,12 11,4 L+ % S.D.) L+ 1,3%) (+, 1,3%) L+ 2,9%) Uit Tabel 3a blijkt dat de teergehalten varieren tussen 23,3 en 32,5 mg per sigaret. Per categorie is geen significant verschil in teergehalten waar te nemen. Dit verschil is wel dui- deli jk aanwezig bi j de nicotinegehalten, die een totaalrange van 0,9 - 4,0 mg per sigaret te zien geven, terwijl bijvoorbeeld de range voor lichte en zware shagtypen varieert van 0,9 - 2,4, respectievelijk 2,7 - 4,0 mg per sigaret. Hieruit kan dus geconcludeerd worden dat de aanduidingen licht, halfzwaar en zwaar zeker niet voor het teergehalte, maar hooguit voor het nicotinegehalte gelden. De overlap tussen de nicotinegehalten uit de verschillende type- klassen is echter ook te groot om van een gerechtvaardigde onderverdeling te spreken. Per merk of fabrikant is deze onderverdeling, voor wat het nicotinegehalte betreft, iets meer te rechtvaardigen, zoals moge blijken uit Tabel 3b, waar de teer- en nicotinegegevens nog eens zi jn gerangschikt naar fabrikant. 8
Page 10: ukb29e00
8 Once the nicotine Content (via GC) and the water content (via the Karl Fischer method) have been determined, it is possible to calculate the tar content in the smoke of a hand-rolled cigarette: Tar ="raw smoke condensate" - water content - nicotine content (all in mg/cigarett.e). 4. Results and discussion 4.1 Measurements under standard conditions Table 3a gives the tar and nicotine contents (in mg per cigarette) of the 44 brands and types of hand-rolled cigarettes investigated, a subdivision being made into the different types of shag, namely strong, medium, mild or light and the other grades (such as for example American blend, Virginia tobacco and "cigarette" tobacco). The table also lists the tar/nicotine ratio as well as the mean draw figure (the number of draws per cigarette) during the smoke analyses. Each value in the Table is the mean value of two independent smoking sessions. For convenience"s sake the duplicate values have not been included in the table. The differences between the duplicate values, however, were never greater than 7.8% for the nicotine content and 7.6% for the tar content respectively. In most cases the duplicates even remained well inside 5%. This datum plus the fact that the duplicate values of the draw figure also never differed by more than 19`/ indicates that the procedure used - from the moinent of the rolling of the cigarettes up to and including the final water and nicotine measurements - has a very acceptable degree of reproducibility. As an illustration, Table 4 shows once again the results of a quadruple measurement of Drum excellent medium. This also clearly reveals the strikingly good reproducibility of the method. Table 4 B PP prQCu ga a_t P.3".A m of tar and nicotine in hand-rolled cigarettes Brand zar_ Nicotine Draw fig ure (mg/cig) (mg/cig) ~ Drum excellent medium 27.7 2.14 11.5 tJ9 28.4 2.15 10.9 ~ ~ 28.7 2.12 11.8 r.t 28.1 2.08 11.5 1%0 cc Mean value 28.2 2.12 11.4 NJ (±°o S.D. ) (± 1.3%) (± 1.3%) (± 2.9%) -j Table 3a shows that the tar contents vary between 23.3 and 32.5 mg per cigarette. No significant difference in tar contents is to be observed per category. Such a difference, however, is present in the case of the nicotine contents which reveal a total range of 0.9 to 4.0 mg per cigarette while, for example, the range for light and strong tobaccos varit-.s from 0.9 to 2.4 and from 2.7 to 4.0 mg respectivPl~v From this it may be concluded, therefore, that the e,, va Y
Page 11: ukb29e00
0' -3 W 8 I- 3 :y W ~c w U7 w a~ .ro~~ W tv0'o , ~ w t~ t Cu rt, o' c+ t-a tU ~F- Q r1 r F~ C7 US Fl FS l7 Q~ (6 c+ E tD 0 rZ: :~' c+ 11 :3it~ ti' n tD cr_ , t) tD 11 tD ct iD ^"tD~ n tD :~I' ['f• F-. G1 C ~"''.~¢ :7. ct 0 tn r- w,t (D N • o~ t~ (D 0 5, i-h •`;p~ ct O U] 1-W- ri eN, 0 ` rt c+ ~,4 QW a Hi A) F-+- f7 P- ri ~ LL U) x~tD q tU h~'• F-'- tt• ±'~~ L~ tv ~ 0 ~3'pf:0 i) N ::5 CO ON Ct ~ w• ci ccr O rH R~.:WCF N lli 0 0 w• ^P'h+. t~ H-a,O 0 c+ `..s'' F-b"l+~C, ct N o' t'D N- w- [n cD h c+ ::i U, tb :~4. (D t:~ Q~. [) U7 Ch ~.'U CL O Or- tD~~ iU Dl C `~"r t+ t7 tr [-F r+- t-D 4~ a cD V4 P• lc ~s ZZ~- -n ~• n~ ~• t~D- c~ o~mc+- m (rA a ~ . a ars o (D y Su i~p (n [n w in ct U7 F- [) t'D 0 0 i n sv ~: Fi o~ f-~ lD tD <.tq BZ860ZtOSL
Page 12: ukb29e00
. Tuhrl !a Tdtr- rn nrcntrneeehohtn in de rook ran rhagstxarrttrn~ onderverdeline naar tvpr thag Halfz-.re shag Mllde shag Merk Teer Nicotine Verhouding Gemiddeld Merk Teer Nicot ne Verhouding Grm~d ii•I,I ~ (mg/sig) (mg/stg) teer/ntc. trekqetal (mg/stg) (mgistg) teer: nic. trekgetal Drum excellent halfzwaar 28,2 2,1 13,3 11,4 Winner excellent 26,4 1,5 17,3 1 1,z Drum select halfzwaar 30,1 2,2 13,6 11,3 Winner mild 26,3 1,4 19.1 10,4 Rider mild halfzwaar 32,1 2,1 15,5 12,2 Van Nelle mild 23,9 0.9 26.6 10.8 Van Nelle halfzwaar 23,8 2,5 9,4 11,1 Kelly mild 25.0 1,5 16,-t 11,4 Retnaert halfzwaar 28,0 2,3 12,3 11,4 Javaanse longens mild 24,7 1,8 13,4 11,7 Samson halfzwaar 27,5 2,1 12,9 11,8 Caballero mild 25,7 1,7 14.9 11,9 Kelly halfzwaar 28,3 1,9 14,7 11,5 Texas mild 28.5 2,2 12,9 11,5 Jacobs export halfzwaar 30,2 2.0 15,2 11,6 Quality licht 32,5 2.4 13•4 11,8 Caballero halfzwaar 26,7 2,2 12,5 11,5 H en R licht 28,9 1,9 15,0 13.3 Kansu shag tobacco 31.0 2.2 13,8 12,0 Gruno halfzwaar 27,6 2,3 11,9 12,2 Range: 23.9-32.5 0.9-2.4 11.9-<6.6 10.4-13,1 Bison halfzwaar 29,1 2,5 11,9 11,3 Twtn Special halfzwaar 27,7 2.4 11.8 12,5 Overige soorten shag Schwarzer Krauser 28,1 2,5 11,4 11,Z American blend/ V irginia/"sigaretten"shag Texas halfzwaar 26,5 1,9 13,7 12,2 Quality halfzwaar 31,3 2,5 12.4 10,4 Merk Teer Nicotine Verhouding Gemiddeld H en R 29,8 2,4 12.6 11,0 (mg/sig) (mg/sig) teer: ntc. trekQetal Range: 23.8-31.1 1,9-2.5 9.4-15.5 10.4-11,5 Zilver excellent Virginia 23,3 1.3 17.7 11,5 Jacobs export mild American 23,4 1,4 17,1 11,3 Zware shae Sterling mild Virginia 29.5 2,6 11.4 13,0 Gruno Amerikaanse shag 31,0 1,9 16.-' 11,7 Merk Teer Nicotine Verhouding Gemiddeld West American blend 26,7 1,6 16,9 11,4 (mg/sig) (mg/sig) teertnic, trekgetal H en R American shag 27,1 1,8 14.9 11,3 Gauloises caporal 28,8 2,1 13.8 10.9 Hrandaris zwaar 28,8 3,1 9,3 10.8 Pall Mall export 25,9 1,9 14,0 12,4 Kentuck excellent zwaar 29.6 3,8 7,9 10,1 Van Nelle special quahty zwaar 29,0 3,4 8,6 11,1 Range: 23.J-31.0 1,3-2 •6 11.4-17.7 10.9-13.0 Van Nelle expon zwaar 2E,2 4,0 7,0 11.1 Jacobs select zwaar 28,6 2,8 10,1 10,4 Javaanse Jongens de luxe zwaar 31,2 3,7 8.4 11,11 Javaartse Jongens tembaco 3/4 zwaar 29,7 2,7 10,8 12,0 Dragon special 26.8 3,0 9,0 10,9 Texas zwaar 28.8 2,9 9,8 9,8 H en R 29,7 3.8 7,9 10,4 Range: 26.8-31,2 2.7-4.0 7.0-10.8 9.8-1I•0 6Z86UZl OSC.
Page 13: ukb29e00
10 Table 3a An cc C r-I [Ii0 ti nanu c;izarettes : subd3 vided accordi njic to type of shao Medium Brand Tlar Nicotine Ratio Mean number of draws ( mg/cig) ( rng/cig) tar, nic . Drum excellent medium Drum select medium Rider mild medium Van Nelle medium Reinart medium Samson medium Kelly medium Jacobs export medium Caballero medium Kansas shag tobacco Gruno medium Bison medium Twin Special medium Schwarzer Krauser Texas medium Quality medium H en R Range : Strong shaa' Brand ~~ Nicotine Ratio Mean number of draws (mg/cig) (mg/cig) tar/nic. Brandaris strong Kentuck excellent strong Van Nelle special quality strong Van Nelle export strong Jacobs select strong Javaanse Jongens de luxe strong Javaanse Jongens tembaco 3/4 strong Dragon special Texas strong H en R Range •
Page 14: ukb29e00
11 Mild shag Ban zar- Nicotine Ratio Mean number of draws (mg/cig) (rng/cig) tarlnic. Winner excellent Winner mild Van Nelle mild Kelly mild Javaanse Jongens mild Caballero mild Texas mild Quality light H en R light Range Other tvpes of shag American blend/Virginia/"cigarette" shag Brand zax_ Nicotine Ratio Mean number of draws (mg/cig) (mg/cig) tar/nic. Zilver excellent Virginia Jacobs export mild American Sterling mild Virginia Gruno American shag West American blend H en R American shag Gauloises caporal Pall Mall export Range
Page 15: ukb29e00
7 al%'l 3b 1 c'c, - cit ritruclxcgc°Jrulte+r in de rook ian s/ragsigaretten; onderve°iclelrng nciar Jabrikaw. Fabrikant i`terk/t5pe sliag Teer Nicotine Dowre Eel)erts Drum excellent / hatfzwaar (mg/sig) 28,2 (n1g/sig) 2,1 Drum select / halfzwaar 30,1 2,2 Rider / mild hnlfzwaar 32,1 2,1 Winner excellent / mild 26,4 1,5 Winner mild / extra mild 26,3 1,4 Zilver excellent / Virginia 23,3 1,3 IIrandaris / zwaar 28,8 3,1 Kentuck excellent / zwaar 29,6 3,8 Van Nelle Van Nelle / mild 23,9 0,9 Van Nelle / halfzwaar 23,8 2,5 Van Nelle special quality/zwaar 29,0 3,4 Van Nelle export / zwaar 28,2 4,0 Reinaert / halfzwaar 28,0 2,3 Niemei jer Saftison / halfzwaar 27,5 2,1 Kellv / mild 25,0 1,5 Kelly / halfzwaar 28,3 1,9 Jacobs export / halfzwaar 30,2 2,0 Jacobs export / mild American 23,4 1.4 Jacobs select / zwaar 28,6 2,8 Sterling / mild Virginia 29,5 2,6 lavaanse Jongens de luxe/zwaar 31,2 3,7 Javaanse Jongens tembaco / 3/4 zwaar 29,7 2,7 Javaanse Jongens / mild 24,7 1,8 Turinac Gruno / halfzwaar 27,6 2,3 Gruno / Anierikaans 31,0 1,9 Fjison / hnlfzwalr 29,1 2,5 Twin special / halfiwaar 27,7 2,4 Gauloises caporal / tabac 5 cigarettes 28,8 2,1 Pall Mall export / cigarette tobacco 25,9 1,9 Dragon special / zwaar 26,8 3,0 Schwarzer Krauser / Kentucky 28,1 2,5 Ed Laurens Caballero / miid 25,7 1,7 Caballero / halfzwaar 26,7 2,2 Kansas / shag tobacco 31,0 2,2 lt eern lsrna Quality / halfzwaar 31,3 2,5 Quality / licht 32,5 2,4 West / American blend 26,7 1,6 1^*3 Ileupink en Reinders II en R / American 27,1 1,8 LJ1 Fl en R / zwaar 29,7 3,8 II en R / hnlfzwaar 29.8 2,4 H en R / licht 28,9 1,9 a ~ Vcrkoopce_utrale ran CU W lalraksrrorlukten liolland TexaS / z«aar 28,9 2,9 N 1 exas / hall 7wa;1r 26,5 1,9 Texas / mild 28,5 2,2
Page 16: ukb29e00
12 Table 3b Tar and nicotine contents in th smnkP of piand-ro11Pr3 ciaarettes : subd,_vi ded anor3rding to manufacturer Manufacturer Brand/type of tobacco Lax- Nicotine (mg/cig) (mg/cig) Dnuwe Eaberts Drum excellent / medium Drum select / medium Rider / mild medium Winner excellent / mild Winner mild / extra mild Zilver excellent / Virginia Brandaris / strong Kentuck excellent / strong Van Nelle Van Nelle / mild Van Nelle / medium Van Nelle special quality / strong Van Nelle export / strong Reinart / medium Niemeijer Samson / medium Kelly / mild Kelly / medium Jacobs export / medium Jacobs export / mild American Jacobs select / strong Sterling / mild Virginia Javaanse Jongens de luxe / strong Javaanse Jongens tembaco : 3/4 strong Javaanse Jongens / mild Turmac Gruno / medium Gruno / American Bison / medium Twin special / medium Gauloises caporal Pall Mall export / / cigarette tobacco cigarette tobacco Ed Laurens Dragon special / strong 3chwarzer Krauser / Kentucky Caballero / mild eemtsma Caballero / medium Kansas / shag tobacco Quality / medium N U'1 ~ Quality / light ~ West / American blend N O ~ HeLlpink en RQi nderG H en R / American ~ H en R j' s trong H en R / medium H en R / light W W
Page 17: ukb29e00
Z501 Z0983'f \ \ \
Page 18: ukb29e00
14 11 4.2 Variation of different parameters when hand roll'ngg- cigarettes . The tar and nicotine contents which are set out in Table 3 are obtained when certain - arbitrary - standard conditions are selected during the process of making and conditioning the hand- rolled cigarettes. The most important parameters which should be chosen are the sort of cigarette paper (particularly as regards length and air permeability), and the quantity of tobacco which is used per cigarette. Another question to be asked is whether the shag needs to be conditioned at a different temperature and;or relative humidity than factory-made cigarettes. Lt seeruerl obviotizk to adopt . the best,-sell•ing brand,= --aame1 ~ For various reasons 3 gramme' wa.s'4seleated4as " Firstly, this is t.he weight 4, statistics and:.in , salesfpro c~t . ~" g~ . t ~ on e~. f~om° 5liag~°"° "`~'z c re`-t~' ~ . ,.' i~ '~uee_ it appeared t~hat ~. ~~M "~ ~ `grd e p '! g"°aretts is ~easp~abl~ ~ selection. oreover~ `t~iis e ~ : ~ f . ta»> , ~ ~~ w ~. ght wei N weigh~; or ev~Yi ~' ~i~~her { - ' grammes ), is also used in the international literature. The conditioning conditions for the shag are quite arbitrary. The basic principle in the investigation was that the method should correspond as far as possible with the existing standard method for factory-made cigarettes. Initially, therefore, conditioning at 60% relative humidity and a temperature of '~3'2°C was selected. To summarize it may be said that the cigarettes were smoked as far as possible in accordance with an existing standard method for factory cigarettes while the freely selectable parameters were chosen so as to be as close as possible to the actual situation in practice. Nevertheless a study has also been made of the tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes when various parameters are changed; this was so that the extent of the influence of these parameters could be established. 4.2.1 Sort of cigarette paper As the £irst variable parameter, the was studied for the brand Drum excellent~ to Rizla, six other sorts of paper were tested, while two arbitrary types of filter were also included in the experiment so that the general influence of a filter could also be demonstrated. The results are given in Table 5. This table also includes the air permeability of the paper so that it is possible to ascertain how this is related to the final tar and nicotine contents. It appears that the tar and nicotine contents vary considerably for different sorts of papers. And not only is the sort t,f paper important but also, and particularly so, its air permeability. The 7 sorts of papcr can be subdivided roughly into two groups. The first group, with an air permeability of 633.'2 - 71.4 rnljrninjcm2ZjkPa, results in tar contents of 25.3 - :?$.21 2501209535
Page 19: ukb29e00
Tahel 5 i'ergelijking van de teer- en nicotinegehallett in de rook van shagsigaretlen bij gebruik van verschillende soorten sigareuenpapier en filterhulzen (nzerk shag: Drum excellent half'waar). , 1,1erk Luchtdoor- Teer Nicotine Verhouding Iaatbaarheid* laatbaarheid* (mg/sig) (mg/sig) teer nic. papier Rizia rood 64,1 28,2 (27,7;28,4; 2,12 (2,14;2,15; 13,3 28,7;28,1) 2,12;2,08) hiascotte 69,4 26,4 (27,2;25,7) 1,95 (1,94;1,95) 13,5 Drum 71,2 25,8 (26,4;25,2) 2,05 (2,08;2,02) 12,6 Van Neile 63,2 25,3 (24,2;26,5) 1,93 (1,95;1,91) 13,1 Rizia blauw 4,3 35,4 (35,4;35,5) 2,33 (2,28;2,37) 15,2 Samson 4,9 31,9 (33,3;30,5) 2,48 (2,50;2,45) 12,9 Matrozen 9,9 29,2 (29,4;29,0) 2,04 (2,03;2,05) 14,3 Range: 4,3-71,2 25,3-35,4 1,93-2,48 12,6-15,2 Merk filterhulzen Mascotte 26,1 (26,1;26,2) 2,08 (2,08;2,07) 12,5 Match 24,3 (24,2;24,1) 2,01 (2,08;1,94) 12,1 [* in m1/min/cm2/kPa; metingen verricht door mr. Allman, Filtrona Instruments, England.]
Page 20: ukb29e00
15 mg/cigarette and nicotine contents of 1.93 - 2.12 mg/cigarette. The second group, with an air permeability of 4.3 - 9.9 ml/min/cm2/kPa, results in tar contents of 29.2 - 35.4 mg/cigarette and nicotine contents of 2.04 - 2.4$ mg/cigarette. Table 5 Comparison of the tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes when different sorts of yivarette Pavers and filters are used (brand o£ shag : Drum excellent medium) $r•arid ~ za6L- lig• perrneabi3.ity* (mg/cig) Nicotine (mg/cig) R, f, tar nic Rizla red Mascotte Drum Van Nelle Rizla blue Samson Matrozen Rouge Range . Brand of filters ~ Mascotte Match {* in ml/min/cm2/kPa; measurements carried out by Mr. Allman, Filtrona Instruments, England)
Page 21: ukb29e00
16 The tar and nicotine contents increase therefore if the air permeability decreases. The fact that the tar and nicotine contents can still be different with paper sorts with a virtually identical air permeability shows that the air permeability is not the only factor. The tar content, for example, using the two Rizla papers is approximately 10% higher than that of the other sorts with virtually the same air permeability. The tar/nicotine content ratio appears to increase somewhat with decreasing air permeability, which means that the air permeability of the paper has a relatively larger influence on the tar content than on the nicotine content. This is also shown by the fact that the highest measured tar content is approximately 40% higher than the lowest measured tar content while the highest measured nicotine content is approximately 28% higher than the lowest measured nicotine content. ,n d aotine cork~erk ~ e ~~ . of rmeasured content,~F r Th K Mv r wi.~Ii- -1the f_%~t~r~.~ss ~h nt~~oYled 4!1M*VW Iri'any case this may be due to the use o£ yet another sort of cigarette paper. It is worth noting that the th8w--Hat~d~Li~761T6VFY g ~ - ; . w~'~~o`iz i~ter whiie t~ie tar content remaiiied alrnost the This again shows that the tar content is influenced to a relatively greater degree by the filter than the nicotine content. This is also revealed by the tar/nicotine ratio'. It is probably a good idea to draw attention once more to the generally excellent duplicate values relating to the mean values in Table 5. This shows in particular how surprisingly good the repeatability of the overall method is, as long as the variable parameters are fixed. 4.2.2 Conditioning and tobacco weight The possible important parameters to be studied next were the influences of the conditioning conditions and the weight of tobacco per cigarette. These parameters were examined together because the weight of the tobacco can vary depending on the conditioning circumstances, namely through absorption or loss of water and/or volatile components in the tobacco. In this respect it may also make a difference whether the tobacco which is used per cigarette is weighed before or after the conditioning period. In the general investigation of all brands a relative humidity of 60% and a temperature of 22°C were selected for the conditioning, while the fixed weight quantity (1 gramme) was weighed before conditioning, i.e. immediately after the packs of tobacco were opened. To find out how great an influence the conditioning has on the moisture content, the moisture content was determined both before and after the conditioning. Two independent methods were used for this, namely the drying stove method and the Karl Fischer method. The drying stove method is based on the measurement of the weight loss after heating of the tobacco for 16 hours at 11t)°C whereas with the Karl Fischer method the water content is 2501Z09838
Page 22: ukb29e00
17 . determined in a methanol extract of the tobacco. The results for the 44 brands/types of shag are given in Table 6. Depending on the method used, the moisture contents are: hp oQ conditioning 15.6 - 25.5% (drying stove) or 10,6 - 19.7% (Karl Fischer) and after conditioning 13.8 - ,:1 . 6`.'s (drying stove) or 11 . t) - 14. 30% ( 'Karl Fischer ) . For each brand or type the moisture content decreases almost every time, the extent to which this happens being dependent on both the brand or type and on the method used. It is very striking that the drying stove method almost always gives higher figures than the Karl Fischer method. From Karl Fischer method really based on the assumption that methanol is 10% - whereas t investigation has revea compounds is the sometimes OTe-i mali this it might be deduced that the only yields the water percentage- the extraction yield of water in Y'A w is to More research will certainly have to be done to find a good, reliable method of determining the water content in tobacco although the data now available already provides an overall picture of the influence the conditioning has on the moisture/water content. Table 7 gives the results of the measurements of the tar and nicotine contents of two brands of shag (Drum excellent medium and Van Nelle export strong) under two different sets of conditioning conditions and using three different weight quantities. The hand- rolled cigarettes were conditioned and smoked at a relative humidity of 60% and 70% while 1, 0A and 0.8 grammes were adopted as the weighed quantities. A study was also made of the influence of the weighing of these quantities before and after the toba~•c:o was conditioned. ~ Virtually all the measurements were taken in duplicate; two of the measurements taken four times. The main striking feature once again is the fact that all the duplicate values correspond very close3.y. . The duplicate values differ by no more than 3. 6% and 8. 4% for the tar and nicotine contents respectively. various ~ u ~,~ -_- - c~c~`iti~n to the tirne. Closer one of these t, which
Page 23: ukb29e00
T.tw.-/ + H~~t vnrhttrhalrr van 44 mrrKen en trpen shaRtabah vortr en na het condurontren van dr rahal hri 1.'C en rrn rrlattevt rochrrgherd van 60't6- grrnrten met behulp van de droog- ston/mrthndr en de Karl Frsher-rnethode. Mllde sha¢ Halfzware shaa Merk Vochtgehalte (in "4) Merk Vochtptehalte (in %) voor contlrtionenng na condiuoncnng v06r conditionering na conditionering t Karl d droo st f K l droogstoof Karl Fisher droogstoof Karl Fisher roogstoo Fisher g oo rr Fuhcr Winner excellent 6 4 14 21 18 6 13 7 Drum excellent halfzwaar 20,9 14,7 18,6 13,2 Winner mild , , 19,2 12,9 , , 16,8 13 1- Drum select halfzwaar 19,7 12,7 16.9 12,6 Van Nelle mild 23,1 15.7 . 4 14 19 3 Rider mild halfzwaar 18.7 12,0 17,3 13,4 Kelly mild 21,4 14,6 , , 20 2 ~ 13 5 Van Nelle halfzwaar 21,8 16.2 19,0 12,4 Javaanse Jongens mild 21 1 15,8 , , 20 2 13 2 Reinaert halfzwaar 20 8 15 7 16 9 13 4 , , , Samson halfzwaar . 24.4 , 17,5 . 17,8 , 13.8 Caballero mild Texas mild 22,4 15,8 20,3 15.6 20,6 13,6 18,2 12,9 Kelly halfzwaar 25,5 15.8 20,3 13,1 Quality licht 17 5 12,3 18 3 12 6 Jacobs export halfzwaar 22,0 14.2 17,1 13.5 H en R licht , 4 13,0 20 , , 17 4 8 13 Caballero halfzwaar 21.9 16,8 17,8 13,4 , , , Kansas shag tobacco 22.9 13,7 21,6 14,0 Range: 17.5-23.1 11.3-15.8 16.8-10.6 12.6-1 43 Gruno halfzwaar 23.5 16.3 17,9 13,2 Bison halfzwaar i 16,4 10.6 15,9 11,0 Orerige soorten shag Tw n Special halfzwaar 21.6 15,3 18,3 12,8 American blend/ Virttinia/"sigarettea"sha¢ Schwarzer Krauser 21,1 15,8 16,6 12.5 Texas haifzwaar 21.7 16,8 18,4 14.3 Merk Vochtqehalte (in W,) Quality halfzwaar 15,6 11,7 16,8 12,3 v66r conditionering na conditionenng HenR 20,4 15,6 16,0 12.7 droogstoof Karl droogstoof Karl Range: 15,6-15.5 10.6-17,5 15,9-11.6 11.0-1I.3 Fisher Fisher Zilver excellent Virginia 6 17,0 24 20,8 13.0 Zware shag il i , 22 2 16 5 20 2 14 3 Vochtgehalte (in %) d Amer can Jacobs export m mild Vi ia lin i St , , 1 20 7 15 , , 19 4 13 9 v66r conditionering na conditionering er g rg n o A erikaana sha G , , 5 16 3 23 , , 17 9 13 2 drootstoof Karl droogstoof Karl g run m e West American blend , , 16,4 l l,l , , 17,2 11,8 Fisher Fisher H en R American shag 20,8 15,6 16,6 12,6 Gauloises caporal 5 17,6 22 17,2 12,6 Brandaris zwaar 19,9 15,6 16,0 13.3 Pall Mall export , 8 14,9 20 18,4 12,9 Kentuck excellent zwaar 20,3 16,0 16,5 13,1 , Van Nelle special quality zwaar 20,5 17,8 13,8 12,7 Range: 1-17.6 I-14,6 11 16 16.6-20.8 11.8-1 d.1 Van Nelie export zwaar 22,8 19.7 14,1 11.9 , . Jacobs select zwaar 22,4 16,5 17,1 12,4 Javaanse Jongens de luxe zwaar 20,8 14,2 17,7 13.5 Javaanse Jongens tembaco 3/4 zwaar 20,7 13,7 19,9 13.9 Dragon special 21,2 14.3 16,8 12.9 Texas zwaar 18,0 15,9 13.8 12,3 H en R 18,6 14,9 14,4 12,2 Range: 18.6-22.8 13.7-19.7 13.8-19.9 11.9-1 J.9 pt,86lJZl aSZ
Page 24: ukb29e00
18 Table 6 Medium sha-- e M-Q e con cent o ;R ncas 3na c L9 tobacco before and after conditioning of the tobacco at 2? °C and aa relative humidity of 8U`,~ mPas reri using the drying stove method and the Karl ri arher method DN=~ r Moisture content iin S;1 before conditioning after conditi oni n~z drying stove Karl drying stove Karl Fischer Fischer Drum excellent medium Drum select medium Rider mild medium Van Nelle medium Reinart medium Samson medium Kelly medium Jacobs export medium Caballero medium Kansas shag tobacco Gruno medium Bison medium Twin Special medium Schwarzer Krauser Texas medium Quality medium H en R Range • Strong shaj;~ Brand . Moisture content (' n %) before conditioning after conditioning;, drying stove Karl drying stove Karl Fischer Fischer Brandaris strong Kentuck excellent strong Van Nelle special quality strong Van Nelle export strong Jacobs select strong Javaanse Jongens de luxe strong Javaanse Jongens tembaco 3/4 strong Dragon special Texas s trong H en k Range .
Page 25: ukb29e00
19 Mild shag Brand Winner excellent Winner mild Van Nelle mild Kelly mild Javaanse Jongens Caballero mild Texas mild Quality light H en R light Range . Moisture content (in °o) before conditioning after conditioning drying stove Karl drying stove Karl Fischer Fischer mild Other types of shag American blend/Vir inia/"cj~garette" tobacco Brand Moisture content (in %) before conditioning after conditioning drying stove Karl drying stove Karl Fischer Fischer Zilver excellent Virginia Jacobs export mild American Sterling mild Virginia Gruno American shag West American blend H en R American shag Gauloises caporal Pall Mall export Range .
Page 26: ukb29e00
c r,. •a .,rn 2 mrrden thayrrgarrrren hti vrrtchrNrnJr cnnJmonr•nrr_ r.In.r-::.•t ^,I •n 'u„ ~rl,.rrrve vOr•htiShrldl rn vrrtchrlh•ndr yewuhrshnavrrlheJrn lah.a (/ •r rSrom. atsewnqen vnnr a/ na condttronerrng. Merk: Drum eacellent halfrw.ar. Merk: Van Velle e.port xwanr. Relatieve vochhghe d Tabaksgew Teer IVicottne Relatieve vnchtighevd w Tccr Tabakz¢e N ,.• iinr (in gram) (in mg/sig) (in m8/si8) _ (in grom) (tn mBrS.g) _ (in na;. •.Igt Voor Condttonenng Vnor cundtlronenng 8em. Sem° g_em gern 60% 1,0 27,7 2,14 60% 1,0 28,a 4.10 28,4 2,15 28.0 )28.2 3,93 )4,01 28 7 )28,2 12 2 )2,12 , 28,1 , 2,08 Na conditronerrng 0 9 28 0 06 2 1 0 32 0 28 4 , , 28,7 )28 ,3 . 2 )2,09 , , 32,6 )32,3 , 4,25 )4.--6 0,8 27,7 2,07 0,9 30,0 3,98 28,1 )27,9 2.08 )2,07 30,2 )30,1 4,06 14.02 Na conditonerrng 0,8 28,2 3,77 28 0 )28 1 87 82 13 1,0 30.8 2,48 , , 3. , 30,3 )30,6 2,28 )2.38 0.9 29,9 2,34 Voor conditionering 29 1 )29,5 2 32 )2•33 , , 70% 1,0 28,2 3,68 0.8 28,2 2,18 28,0 3,73 27,2 )27,7 2,12 )2,15 27,6 )28,1 3,60 )3,71 28,4 3,83 Relatieve vochti he d Na conditionering g i 1,0 28,7 3,66 Voor conditionering 29,1 )28,9 3,76 /3,7I 70!b 1,0 29.9 2,10 0,9 28,1 3.55 29,1 )29.5 2,07 )2•09 27,4 )27,8 3,70 )3,b-' ~ ~ Na conditionering 0,8 26,0 3.55 ~ 25 8 )25,9 57 3 )3.56 - , , 1,0 30,3 2,24 30 0 )300.2 2 14 12,19 O ~ . 0 9 27 7 . 2 08 cc . , 26,8 )27 = , 2,06 )2,07 ~ ~ 0,8 26,4 2,01 25,4 )25.9 1,99 )2.00
Page 27: ukb29e00
20 ~ Table 7 Tar and ni cotine contents of 2 brands of hand-rolled ni j;arPt.t.Qs under different conditioni rro conditions. at two relative hurniditi_es and different weights of tobacco of 1, 0.9 and 0.8 ararrirnes weighed before and afte_r c•onditionina. Brand: Drum excellent medium Relative humi di tv Tobacco wt. Z= Nicotine (in granmmes) (in mg/cig) (in mg/cig) 60% Rel ati ve humi.di tv 70% Before conditioning After conditioning Before conditioning After conditioning Brand: Van Nelle ex,T.)o_rt stron;it me-an m a an Relative humidity Tobacco rat. Lax- (in grarnrnes ) (in mg/cig) 60% 70% Before conditioning After conditioning Before conditioning After conditioning Nicotine (in mg/cig) mean mean
Page 28: ukb29e00
I The most important conclusions which can be drawn from Table 7 are - If the weight of tobacco is kept constant (31 gramme), a transition from 60% to 70% relative humidity gives a maximum variation of 13% in tar and nicotine content. This increase or decrease applies both when the 1 gramme of tobacco is weighed before and after the conditioning. The extent to which the contents increase or decrease differs for the tar and nicotine contents, but also for the different brands. Given the tobac co is weigfrec~ conditioning increase ~Mtq~~ '~e~gh` per hand-rolled cigarette, are w_hjaru~the w`..~'ie ~~ ~:f_- ,. he o~acco ~ ~x ~ a~~:bt7°o anc~ ;N% relative varies from 0 - 15%. humidities. The If the conditioning conditions are constant, a decrease in the tobacco quantity used per hand-rolled cigarette also brings about a reduction in the tar and nicotine contents. This decrease is found to be much greater when the tobacco quantity is weighed after the conditioning than when this is done before conditioning. It is striking, moreover, that the percentage decrease in the tar and nicotine contents is smaller than the percentage decrease in the tobacco weight. When 0.8 grammes instead of 1 gramme of tobacco is used after conditioning, then the tar and nicotine contents for the two brands fall by between 4 and 14%. The fall in the tar and nicotine contents when the tobacco quantity is weighed before the conditioning is, surprisingly enough, negligibly small. For Drum excellent medium under all the conditions investigated the tar contents vary within the range 25.9- 36.6 mg/cigarette, and the nicotine contents within the range 2.00 - 2.38 mg/cigarette. The tar and nicotine contents measured under the standard conditions (60% relative humidity. 1 grarr,me of tobacco before conditioning) amount to 28.2 and 2.12 mg/cigarette respectively, which is more or less in the middle of the total range. For Van Nelle export strong under all the conditions investigated the tar contents vary within the range 25.9- 32.3 mg/cigarette, and the nicotine contents within the range :3.56 - 4.26 mg/cigarette. The tar and nicotine contents measured under the standard conditions amount to '"8.2 and 4.01 mg/cigarette respectively, which is also more or less in the middle of the total range. This applies both for Z501209845
Page 29: ukb29e00
22 It would be getting too far away from the subject to discuss all possible causes of the above results. There is no doubt that, among other things, a change in the moisture content of the tobacco and the diameter of the rolled cigarette for a given weight usage as well as the resulting changed combustion process are important factors which lead to differences in tar and nicotine contents. An important general piece of information arising from this study about the influence of variations in the different variable parameters on the tar and nicotine contents is that the differences in the tar or nicotine contents measured under the two most extreme conditions are no more than 25% at the maximum. This difference is much smaller than the maximum difference which can occur in the tar and nicotine contents as the result of differences in the sort of paper used. This difference was in fact 40%. To summarize, it may be concluded that, when the sort of paper, the weight quantity of the tobacco and the conditioning conditions are varied, significant differences occur in the measured tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes. If, however, these parameters are fixed, then the method employed in this investigation can be used to obtain good reproducible results which are comparable in terms of reliability with the results obtained with the standard method for factory-made cigarettes. of hand-rolled ciaarettes ooacco ,Una nF, e For the purpose of finding out whether it is possible to use a general formula to calculate the content of nicotine in the smoke of the rolled cigarette from the data on the nicotine content in the tobacco, the nicotine contents were determined both in the smoke and in the tobacco for all 44 brands. The results are given in Table 8. The nicotine contents in the shag before conditioning (based on the total tobacco weight including water) vary from 0.94 - 2. 19°{:. The corresponding contents in the smoke vary from 0.90 - 4.02 mg/cigarette, based on 1 gramme of tobacco per cigarette. Roughly speaking, the nicotine content in the smoke increases when there is an increased content in the tobacco, but the relationship does not appear to be linear. The rough rule of thumb that the nicotine content (in mg/cigarette ) in the smoke is approximately equal to the nicotine content (in %) in the tobacco appears to be reasonably correct although for some brands (for example Quality and Gruno) the deviation from the rule is still very considerable. This means it is not feasible to draw up a generally applicable formula for all brands and types of shag. This also becomes clear 25012Q9846
Page 30: ukb29e00
T.,"ir • N'r, arrnrg( "alrrn rn shas•tahak en rn Jr rnok ran de irverrvnkamtrtee shagsrgarrtrc•n htilde shag 1lalfiwAre hat; Merk N cntm e y.Colinr Vtrhaue lin!~ Merk Nicotine Nicotine Verhouding _ (`w )~ ti r (m ni r,i.,k 1 ti u (%) (mg/sig) nic. rookitabak , in nhak q g V rn rn , in tsbak in rook , Winner excellent 1.41 1,53 1,09 Drum excellent halfzwaar 2,08 2,14 1,03 Winner mild 1,49 1.38 0,93 Drum select halfzwaar 1.61 2,22 1,38 Van Nklle mild 0,94 0,90 0,96 Rider mild halfzwaar 1.42 2,07 1,46 Kelly mild 1,51 1.52 1,01 Van Nelle halfzwaar 2,02 2,52 1,25 Javaanse Jongens mild 1,53 1,85 I,''-I Reinaert halfzwaar 1.75 2,27 1,30 Caballero mild 1,87 1,72 0,92 Samson halfzwaar 1.84 2,14 1,16 Texas mild 1,71 2,Z 1 1,1-9 Kelly halfzwaar 1,60 1,93 1,21 Quality licht 1.47 2,42 1,65 Jacobs export halfzwaar 1,62 1,99 1,23 H en R licht 1,50 1,93 1,Z9 Caballero halfzwaar 1,86 2,21 1,19 Kansas shag tobacco 1,79 2,25 1,26 Range: 0,94-1.87 0.90-Z.><1 0.92-1,65 Gruno halfzwaar 1,53 2,32 1,52 Bison halfzwaar 2,24 2,45 1,09 OreriQe soorten shaQ Twin Special halfzwaar 1,90 2,36 1,24 Americao blend/Vir[;inia/"siearetten"shatt Schwarzer Krauser 2,05 2,47 1,20 Texas halfzwaar 1,59 1,93 1,21 Merk Nicotine Nicotine Verhouding Quality halfzwaar 64 1 2 53 54 1 , , , (%) (mg/stg) nic. rook/tabak H en R 1,84 2,36 1,28 in tabak in rook Range: 1.42-2.24 1.93-2.53 1,03-1.54 Zilver excellent Virginia 1,07 1,32 1,23 Jacobs export mild American 1,38 1,37 0,99 Zwrre shatt Sterling mild Virginia 2,04 2,58 1,26 Gruno Amerikaanse shag 1,18 1.91 1,62 Merk Nicotine Nicotine Verhouding West American blend 1,27 1,58 1.24 (%) (mg/sig) nic.rook/tabak H en R American shag 1,44 1.82 1,26 in tabak in rook Gauloises caporal 1,47 2,08 1,41 Pall Mall export 1,37 1,85 1,35 Brandaris zwaar 2.24 3,10 1,38 Kentuck excellent zwaar 2,86 3,76 1,31 Range: 1.07-2.04 1.32-2.58 0,99-1.62 Van Nelle special quality zwaat 2,33 3,36 1,44 Van Nelle export zwaar 3,19 4,02 1.26 Jacobs select zwaar 2,19 2,84 1,30 Javaartse Jongens de luxe zwaar 2,90 3,70 1,28 Javaanse Jongens tembaco 3/4 zwaar 2,16 2,75 1,27 Dragon special 2.31 2,97 1,--9 Texas zwaar 2,00 2,95 1,48 H en R 2,68 3,77 1,41 Range: 2,00-3.19 2,75-4.02 1..6-1,>8 , tfisWtasZ
Page 31: ukb29e00
'? 3 Table 8 Nicotine contents in shaa and in the smoke of the cij;~arettes rolled from it Medium shaF-P Brand Nicotine ;~o} in tobacco (mg/cig) in smoke Ratio nic. smoke/tobacco Drum excellent medium Drum select medium Rider mild medium Van Nelle medium Reinart medium Samson medium Kelly medium Jacobs export medium Caballero medium Kansas shag tobacco Gruno medium Bison medium Twin Special medium Schwarzer Krauser Texas medium Quality medium H en R Range StronF-' sha Brand Nicotine Nicotine - ~:) M (mg/cig) nic. smoke/toba.cco in tobacco in smoke Brandaris strong Kentuck excellent strong Van Nelle special quality strong Van Nelle export strong Jacobs select strong Javaanse Jongens de luxe strong Javaanse Jongens tembaco 3/4 strong Dragon special Texas strong H en R Range
Page 32: ukb29e00
24 Mild shag Brand Nicotine Nicotine Ratio ( % ) (mg/cig) nic srnr+ke/tobacc~o in tobacco in smoke Winner excellent Winner mild Van Nelle mild Kelly mild Javaanse Jongens mild Caballero mild Texas mild Quality light H en R light Range . Other ttipes of tobacco American blend/Virginia "cigarette" tobacco Brand Nicotine Nicotine Ratio P., ) (mg/cig) nic, smoke/tobaccc, in tobacco in smoke Zilver excellent Virginia Jacobs export mild American Sterling mild Virginia Gruno American shag West American blend H en R American shag Gauloises caporal Fall Mall export Range .
Page 33: ukb29e00
25 / from the nicotine' smoke/tobacco ratios which are also given in Table 8. Even if the nicotine contents in the tobacco are calculated on the basis of dry weight, there is no improvement in the relationship. It can also be seen from Table 8 that the peaks in nicotine contents in the smoke of certain brands of hand-rolled cigarettes are usually corroborated by the corresponding content in the tobacco. If we examine the nicotine content in the tobacco (or the smoke), the designation strong tobacco is generally speaking a fairly apt description, but in the case of light and medium tobaccos there is still so much overlap that these terms are in fact meaningless. This is even more true when we also take the tar contents into consideration. 4.4. Comparison with similar research In the international literature very little has been published on the tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes. Two publications are of interest for the comparison of the results with those of the present research. q k r_ U: investigated 13 Canadian light shag toba~CO's 'e ~ cigarettes by hand with an average weight of 1.37 grammes and obtained tar contents in the range 18.2 - 26.8 mg/cigarette and nicotine contents in the range 0.92 - 1.70 mg/cigarette. The highest tar and nicotine contents were obtained with the brand Drum, namely 26.8 and 1.70 mg/cigarette respectively. The number of draws varied from 9.1 - 14.6. In a36ewhL:etadyko, summarised by ~Z ° ', 13 brands of shag were ~ ~ also lnves rga ed. The (fil e ss hand-rolled cigarettes contained 0.92 - 1.09 grammes of tobacco each. The tar contents varied from 32.6 - 43.2 mg/cigarette, the nicotine contents varied from 1.66 - 2.99 mg/cigarette. The number of draws varied from 12.3 - 19.2. / / ' ~ The latter study, the Frenc with our own research average, 1 gramme of Q rr o S . ! Ct pl ae, is still t ause filterless -6bacco were also made. machine parameters vle-re different. A higherNdrawi.ng but a shorter drawing time, and a lower drawing volume This may explain the relatively higher tar contents in study. frequency.,~ O were used~ the French The tar contents (23.8 - 32.5 mg/cigarette), nicotine contents (0.90 - 4.02 mg/cigarette) measured in our investigation (of 44 brands and types of shag) and the drawing figures (9.8 - 13.3) certainly do not contradict the foreign investigations mentioned. The differences which occur are fully attributable to a different choice of variables such as the method of rolling the cigarette and selection of smoking machine parameters. 2501209850 e best for comparing igarettes with, on ~ ' Only the smokin (g
Page 34: ukb29e00
26 5. Conclusions , 1. The method used in the present investigation to determine the tar and nicotine contents in the smoke of hand-rolled cigarettes is found to give highly reproducible results provided that the various freely selectable parameters such as type of cigarette paper, conditioning conditions, tobacco weight per cigarette and the method of rolling the cigarettes are fixed. 2. It is possible to use the above method as a standard method of determining the tar and nicotine contents to obtain values which could be stated on the tobacco packaging. 3. The standard method described in this report has been used to investigate 44 brands and types of shag on sale in the Netherlands. The tar contents in the smoke vary from 23.8- 32.5 mg/cigarette, the nicotine contents vary from 0.9 - 4.0• mg/cigarette. The corresponding nicotine contents in the tobacco itself vary from 0.9 - 3.2%. 4. The variation of the tar contents between the different brands or types are much smaller (a factor of 1.4 between the extremes) than the variation of the nicotine contents (a factor of 4.4 between the extremes). 5. Although a comparison with factory-made cigarettes is riot directly permissible, it may be said in general terms that the measured tar and nicotine contents in hand-rolled cigarettes are considerably higher than the contents in factory-made cigarettes, even those without filters. 6. The method used in the present investigation is suitable for drawing up an order of ranking for different brands and types of shag in terms of their nicotine and/or tar contents in the smoke of the hand-rolled cigarettes. This order of ranking must not be combined directly with the ranking which is obtained for factory-made cigarettes which are test-smoked in accordance with an existing NEN standard. 7. The ranking of types of shag as mentioned in paragraph 6 must not be directly associated with the relative health risks to which the smokers of given types of shag are subject, just as this cannot be done with the ranking of factory-made cigarettes. When comparing the tar and nicotine contents of cigarettes and shag the ratio of these contents does not give absolute information about the relative health risks of factory-made cigarette smokers as opposed to hand- rolled cigarette smokers. Too many other factors also play an important part here, for example the typical smoking behaviour of an individual (number of cigarettes per day, diawing volume, drawing time, drawing frequency, degree of inhaling etc). One fact is clear arld that is that both those who ;rno Ye factory-made cigarettes arid those who smoke hand-rolled cigarettes are running a not inconsiderable risk. 2•5o 1213913,51
Page 35: ukb29e00
8. The designationA strong, medium and light or mild tobacco which are usually used to denote the various types of shag are applicable at the very outside to the nicotine content, but certainly not to the tar content. Furthermore, these designations are more correct. within brands than when making comparisons between brands. If the designations strong, medium and mild are linked with the relative health risks to which the smokers of these sorts of tobacco are subject, then this must be regarded as very misleading. 1 September 1987 Dr. A. de Kok (Head - Tobacco Section) 6. References 1. 'R~.ckerfi.~`et al.,~'rev. Medic~e, 14 (1985) 226-233. 2. J, : W. $el~' ~`6b': Ii3tetWJ.f, 188 (1986) no. 3, 27-33.

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size: