Tobacco Documents Online

. :. PWJ'LIP' MORRIS U. S. A. INTER-OFF1!CE' CORRESPONDENCE RICHNlOND, Y4RGINIIA' Mr. H. G. Daniel Date; September 15, 1976 C'. H. O'Donohue Change in Smoking Behavior on Switching to Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Very few studies have been done on the topic of what changes occur in ~smoking behavior when individuals switch from one level of nicotine to another in their cigarettes. One of the earliest (Finnegan et al 1945) studied~ 24 smokers using cigarettes with 2.08% (1.96' mg/cigt, smoke)) versus 0. 23% (0.34 mg/cigt, smoke) ihi the tobacco. For the first month the subjects smoked their own brand and then were switched' either to the 1'ow-nilcotine cigarette (LNC), or the high-nicotine cigarette (HNC)1. It appeared that the number of' cigarettes consumedi daily had no correlation to the degree of nicotine i'ntake. The authors stated the sample was too, small for any definite conclusions. . The next reports by Firth plus Ashton and Watson in 1970 foundl that smokers' naodified, their smoking behavior when, confronted with cigarettes of varying nicotine levels. It was found that LNC were smoked more rapidly (more frequent puffing) and that the HNC took a, longer time to be smoked. The number of subjects ranged from 9 to 36. Goldfarb and Jarvik (1974)1 studied 18 subjiects for four weeks sxnoking' half cigareftes, i. e. , cigarettes that were either cut in hal'f' or marked' at the midpoint. There was a slight increase in the total number of cigarettes smoked but not significant (;p:G0.05) . They concluded that the smoker did not try to titrate his nicotine level as' theorized by others. N Turner (19'74) with only 10, subjects found that cigarette consumption ~ increased (,p<0.01) with a switch to1LNC (0.17 to 0.6 mg/cigk). There N was also a corresponding decrease in butt length for LNC. Russell ~ (19?4, 19'75), a proponent of the theory that LNC increases cigarette ~ consumption but is safer, in a, study with 10 subjects found the increase ~ in totaT number smoked was not statistically signi'fiica7at (t = 1.8) when ~ the subjects were switched to LNC (0.14 mg). However, on changing N to HNC (3.2 mg) there was a 38% decrease in consumption and he compared the difference between the HNC and LNC (t = 5.31 p<©.001) . Within a study of 160 men followed for 20 months ('Freedman and Fletcher,, 19'76) a subset of'301 men were examined for nicotine intake. The LNC contained 30% NSM and delivered 1 mg nicotine. The results showed no ihcrease ! in cigarette consumption; however, on changing back to the controls, some subjects modified their smoking, behavior to maintain the lower nicotine intake.

Page I Most of the studies conducted have been on very small population sets and the results are inconclusive. There are reports that changing to LNC increases cigarette consumption while others state the reverse. Thisfollows , what wa;sfound by Waingrow and Horn (1968) in anati~onal'~ sample involving 4,700 interviews: "Of particular interest is the observation that of those who were categorized as having shown a reduction in their 'tar-rating' score, exactly the same number ('27.3'%) were classified as smoking more cigaretttes as were classafied as smolang fewer cigarettes than previously, with 45. 3% showing no change. "" CHOJs Attachment

Ashton, H., D. W. Watson (1970). Brit. Med. J. 2 679-81. Finnegan, J. K ., P. S. Larson~ H1. B. Haag (1945). Science h 94-6.. Firth, C. D. (1'9'71) . Psychopharmacologia ('Berl. ) , 19, 188-92. Freedman, S., C. M. Fletcher (1976). Brit. Med. J. 1 1427-30.. Goldfarb, T. L., M. E. Jarvik (1972). Intl. J. Addictions 7(3), 559-65. Russell, M. A. H. (1974). Lancet l 254-8. ~,. ' Ibid, C'. Wilson et al (19'76) . Brit. Medi. J. 2 414-6. Ibid (1976), Brit. Medl. J. 1 1430-3. Turner, J. A. M.,, R. W. Sillett, K. P. Ball (1974). Lancet 2 73'7-9. Waingrow, S., D. Horrn, (1968). Natl. Cancer Monograph 28, 29-33'.