Topic
Cigarette filter
About: Cigarette filter is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1671 publications have been published within this topic receiving 8907 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
1 / 2
Papers
TL;DR: There is limited evidence that cigarettes were smoked more intensively when the urinary clearance of nicotine was increased and several reports indicate that tar, taste and sensory properties of the smoke as well as the draw resistance of the cigarette may play a role in compensatory smoking.
Abstract: Rationale: Compensation or compensatory smoking, accurately defined, deals with the question of whether switching to cigarette brands with different smoke yields is associated with a change in smoke uptake proportional to the change in machine-derived yields. The issue of compensation is important because it bears on whether switching to ”lighter” brands means lower overall smoke intake or not. Objectives: The present review investigated whether and to what extend low yield cigarettes are smoked more intensively. In addition, published data on whether nicotine, ”tar”, or any other smoke constituent or property influence compensational smoking are summarized. Methods: The studies on compensation were classified as follows: (1) studies on smoking behaviour in relation to cigarette yields (with and without brand switching); (2) studies on compensation for nicotine (switching between cigarettes which differ ”only” in their nicotine yield, nicotine supplementation, manipulation of renal nicotine excretion, administration of nicotine agonists or antagonists); (3) studies on compensation for other factors (influence of tar, taste, irritation, draw resistance). In order to quantify the degree of compensation, an index is defined and applied to selected brand switching studies. This compensation index determines, in relative units, the degree to which a smoker responds to a change in smoke yields with a change in smoke uptake measured by suitable biomarkers. The role of vent blocking is also briefly discussed. Results: Most of the studies which compare the smoking behaviour when smoking cigarettes with different smoke yields supply evidence for ”partial” compensation, suggesting that cigarettes with lower yields are smoked more intensively than those with higher yields. These studies also show that a change in the daily number of cigarettes is not a common mechanism of compensation. Effective vent blocking during smoking is a rare event and can therefore also be regarded as an uncommon mechanism of compensation. Evaluation of a suitable subset of brand-switching studies revealed an average compensation of 50–60% of the nicotine yield. Compensation tended to be more complete when changing to cigarettes with higher yields than when changing to cigarettes with lower yields. In general, brand-switching studies do not supply information on the underlying causal factors responsible for compensatory smoking. Results of the nicotine supplementation studies are not conclusive: some report evidence of nicotine titration, others do not. A general problem with this type of investigation is that continuous nicotine application does not mimic the spike-wise application with cigarette smoking, and may lead to nicotine tolerance. There is limited evidence that cigarettes were smoked more intensively when the urinary clearance of nicotine was increased. A small number of studies provide some evidence that smoking intensity increased after smokers were administered a nicotine antagonist. Several reports indicate that tar, taste and sensory properties of the smoke as well as the draw resistance of the cigarette may play a role in compensatory smoking. Low-yield cigarettes usually have reduced pressure drops which smoke researchers have suggested leads to increased puff volume. This effect seems to be independent of the smoke yield of the cigarette. There is also some evidence that some smokers maintain a consistent pattern of smoking which works independent of any changes in nicotine or tar yields, taste or design features of the cigarette (”functional autonomy”). Conclusions: The available data suggest that smokers partially compensate for a different smoke yield. While the factors and their interaction responsible for compensational smoking are not fully understood, there are data suggesting that a subgroup of smokers may partially compensate for nicotine. Even in this subgroup of smokers, however, the relative importance of the pharmacological versus the sensory effects of nicotine in smoke remains to be determined.
268 citations
TL;DR: This study showed that cigarette combustion will produce high concentration of ROS, and this high concentration in mainstream cigarette smoke probably is one major factor contributing to a high incidence of lung cancer in smokers.
Abstract: Reactive oxygenated species (ROS) not only exist in living organisms, they also exist in our environment. Combustion process and photochemical reactions are the major source of environmental ROS, and combustion process produced ROS has been gradually gaining attention in recent years. The purpose of this study is to determine the concentrations of ROS in the mainstream smoke of cigarettes sold in the marketplace using the DCFH2 fluorescence method and to understand particulate and gaseous concentrations of ROS. This research will also discuss the relationship between ROS and nicotine, found in popular cigarette brands, as well as the effectiveness of cigarette filters to remove ROS. Results indicate that the ROS concentration of mainstream smoke is 18.64- 54.81 nmol H2O2/l while the correlation coefficients of nicotine and tar to total ROS are 0.959 and 0.909, respectively. Gaseous ROS concentrations are 14.32- 39.03 nmol H2O2/l, and make up 71.21-85.99% of the total. It can be clearly seen therefore, that ROS exist mainly in the gaseous phase. Particulate ROS is dominant at PM2.5 (ROSTSP/ROSPM2.5 is 0.652-0.959). The experimental results involving the tobacco leaves and cigarette ash show that ROS in mainstream smoke comes from the combustion process and not from the tobacco leaves. There is no effective means of eliminating ROS from mainstream smoke, regardless of whether a cigarette filter contains active charcoal.
121 citations
TL;DR: The analysis strongly suggests that filter ventilation has contributed to the rise in lung adenocarcinomas among smokers, and the FDA should consider regulating its use, up to and including a ban.
Abstract: The 2014 Surgeon General's Report on smoking and health concluded that changing cigarette designs have caused an increase in lung adenocarcinomas, implicating cigarette filter ventilation that lowers smoking machine tar yields. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now has the authority to regulate cigarette design if doing so would improve public health. To support a potential regulatory action, two weight-of-evidence reviews were applied for causally relating filter ventilation to lung adenocarcinoma. Published scientific literature (3284 citations) and internal tobacco company documents contributed to causation analysis evidence blocks and the identification of research gaps. Filter ventilation was adopted in the mid-1960s and was initially equated with making a cigarette safer. Since then, lung adenocarcinoma rates paradoxically increased relative to other lung cancer subtypes. Filter ventilation 1) alters tobacco combustion, increasing smoke toxicants; 2) allows for elasticity of use so that smokers inhale more smoke to maintain their nicotine intake; and 3) causes a false perception of lower health risk from "lighter" smoke. Seemingly not supportive of a causal relationship is that human exposure biomarker studies indicate no reduction in exposure, but these do not measure exposure in the lung or utilize known biomarkers of harm. Altered puffing and inhalation may make smoke available to lung cells prone to adenocarcinomas. The analysis strongly suggests that filter ventilation has contributed to the rise in lung adenocarcinomas among smokers. Thus, the FDA should consider regulating its use, up to and including a ban. Herein, we propose a research agenda to support such an effort.
119 citations
TL;DR: The results illustrate the vulnerability of organisms in the water column to smoking debris and associated toxicants, and highlight the risks posed by smoked cigarette filter debris to aquatic life.
Abstract: Marine debris is a global environmental issue. Smoked cigarette filters are the predominant coastal litter item; 4.5 trillion are littered annually, presenting a source of bioplastic microfibres (cellulose acetate) and harmful toxicants to marine environments. Despite the human health risks associated with smoking, little is known of the hazards cigarette filters present to marine life. Here we studied the impacts of smoked cigarette filter toxicants and microfibres on the polychaete worm Hediste diversicolor (ragworm), a widespread inhabitant of coastal sediments. Ragworms exposed to smoked cigarette filter toxicants in seawater at concentrations 60 fold lower than those reported for urban run-off exhibited significantly longer burrowing times, >30% weight loss, and >2-fold increase in DNA damage compared to ragworms maintained in control conditions. In contrast, ragworms exposed to smoked cigarette filter microfibres in marine sediment showed no significant effects. Bioconcentration factors for nicotine were 500 fold higher from seawater than from sediment. Our results illustrate the vulnerability of organisms in the water column to smoking debris and associated toxicants, and highlight the risks posed by smoked cigarette filter debris to aquatic life.
118 citations
TL;DR: This study indicates that cigarette designers at Philip Morris, British-American Tobacco, Lorillard and other companies believed for a time that they might be able to reduce some of the most dangerous substances in mainstream smoke through advanced engineering of filter tips.
Abstract: Background When lung cancer fears emerged in the 1950s, cigarette companies initiated a shift in cigarette design from unfiltered to filtered cigarettes. Both the ineffectiveness of cigarette filters and the tobacco industry9s misleading marketing of the benefits of filtered cigarettes have been well documented. However, during the 1950s and 1960s, American cigarette companies spent millions of dollars to solve what the industry identified as the ‘filter problem’. These extensive filter research and development efforts suggest a phase of genuine optimism among cigarette designers that cigarette filters could be engineered to mitigate the health hazards of smoking. Objective This paper explores the early history of cigarette filter research and development in order to elucidate why and when seemingly sincere filter engineering efforts devolved into manipulations in cigarette design to sustain cigarette marketing and mitigate consumers9 concerns about the health consequences of smoking. Methods Relevant word and phrase searches were conducted in the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library online database, Google Patents, and media and medical databases including ProQuest, JSTOR, Medline and PubMed. Results 13 tobacco industry documents were identified that track prominent developments involved in what the industry referred to as the ‘filter problem’. These reveal a period of intense focus on the ‘filter problem’ that persisted from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s, featuring collaborations between cigarette producers and large American chemical and textile companies to develop effective filters. In addition, the documents reveal how cigarette filter researchers9 growing scientific knowledge of smoke chemistry led to increasing recognition that filters were unlikely to offer significant health protection. One of the primary concerns of cigarette producers was to design cigarette filters that could be economically incorporated into the massive scale of cigarette production. The synthetic plastic cellulose acetate became the fundamental cigarette filter material. By the mid-1960s, the meaning of the phrase ‘filter problem’ changed, such that the effort to develop effective filters became a campaign to market cigarette designs that would sustain the myth of cigarette filter efficacy. Conclusions This study indicates that cigarette designers at Philip Morris, British-American Tobacco, Lorillard and other companies believed for a time that they might be able to reduce some of the most dangerous substances in mainstream smoke through advanced engineering of filter tips. In their attempts to accomplish this, they developed the now ubiquitous cellulose acetate cigarette filter. By the mid-1960s cigarette designers realised that the intractability of the ‘filter problem’ derived from a simple fact: that which is harmful in mainstream smoke and that which provides the smoker with ‘satisfaction’ are essentially one and the same. Only in the wake of this realisation did the agenda of cigarette designers appear to transition away from mitigating the health hazards of smoking and towards the perpetuation of the notion that cigarette filters are effective in reducing these hazards. Filters became a marketing tool, designed to keep and recruit smokers as consumers of these hazardous products.
86 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 13 |
| 2020 | 39 |
| 2019 | 100 |
| 2018 | 101 |
| 2017 | 114 |
| 2016 | 85 |