Tobacco industry research and efforts to manipulate smoke particle size: implications for product regulation.

Over the past half-century of cigarette design, tobacco manufacturers have prioritized efficiency of delivery alongside ease of inhalation and use. As a result, the modern cigarette is uniquely effective at facilitating the absorption of nicotine as well as carcinogens and other toxins. The present study draws on internal tobacco company documents to assess industry consideration of the role of smoke particle size as a potentially controllable influence over inhalation patterns and lung exposure. Tobacco manufacturers evaluated particle size manipulation both as a means of controlling physical and sensory product attributes and as a possible approach to reducing health hazards related to exposure. Industry scientists concluded that the smoke aerosol particle distribution of conventional cigarettes, constructed within common parameters, falls within a narrow and effective inhalation range. However, the internal findings suggest that differences in smoke particle size distribution are possible through less conventional approaches to product design. We propose that particle size be included among the many design features to be considered in emerging tobacco product regulation. However, the present review does not address whether particle size regulation would be a plausible means of substantially reducing addictiveness or harmfulness of cigarettes, and therefore we do not propose it as a high-priority target for regulation.     

"Accommodating" smoke-free policies: tobacco industry's Courtesy of Choice programme in Latin America

Objective

To understand the implementation and effects of the Courtesy of Choice programme designed to “accommodate” smokers as an alternative to smoke‐free polices developed by Philip Morris International (PMI) and supported by RJ Reynolds (RJR) and British American Tobacco (BAT) since the mid‐1990s in Latin America.

Methods

Analysis of internal tobacco industry documents, BAT “social reports”, news reports and tobacco control legislation.

Results

Since the mid‐1990s, PMI, BAT and RJR promoted Accommodation Programs to maintain the social acceptability of smoking. As in other parts of the world, multinational tobacco companies partnered with third party allies from the hospitality industry in Latin America. The campaign was extended from the hospitality industry (bars, restaurants and hotels) to other venues such as workplaces and airport lounges. A local public relations agency, as well as a network of engineers and other experts in ventilation systems, was hired to promote the tobacco industry''s programme. The most important outcome of these campaigns in several countries was the prevention of meaningful smoke‐free policies, both in public places and in workplaces.

Conclusions

Courtesy of Choice remains an effective public relations campaign to undermine smoke‐free policies in Latin America. The tobacco companies'' accommodation campaign undermines the implementation of measures to protect people from second‐hand smoke called for by the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, perpetuating the exposure to tobacco smoke in indoor enclosed environments.Latin Americans are highly exposed to second‐hand tobacco smoke (SHS) both in public places and in workplaces.^1,2 In 2001, the Pan American Health Organization launched its “Smoke Free Americas” initiative³ to “raise awareness of the harm caused by secondhand tobacco smoke, and support efforts to achieve more smoke‐free environments in the Americas.” There is longstanding strong public concern over the effects of SHS in Latin America. In 1997, research conducted for Philip Morris International (PMI) showed that about 80% of respondents in four Latin American countries agreed that “Other people''s tobacco smoke poses a long term health risk to nonsmokers.”⁴ These results reflect a stronger consensus that SHS is hazardous than Philip Morris (PM) found in the US in 1989—62% of non‐smokers and 32% of smokers—as the movement for smoke‐free workplaces and public places was beginning to accelerate them.⁵ A 2001 survey conducted for the World Health Organization (WHO) in the main urban areas of Argentina showed strong public support (94%; 96% non‐smokers and 89% smokers) for the creation of smoke‐free places to avoid SHS.⁶ Public opinion polls conducted in 2006 in Argentina⁷ and Uruguay⁸ reported that 92% of respondents agreed that “SHS is dangerous for nonsmokers'' health”, showing an increase in public concern about SHS by 12% since 1997.The main barrier to progress in implementing smoke‐free policies in Latin America has been the efforts by two transnational tobacco companies, PMI and British American Tobacco (BAT), which control almost the entire cigarette market in the region through their subsidiaries (PMI 40%, BAT 60%). Similar to the voluntary self‐regulating advertising codes, which the tobacco companies use to fight restrictions on tobacco advertising,^9,10 the tobacco industry has orchestrated public relations campaigns in Latin America since the mid‐1990s to avoid legislated smoke‐free policies.^11,12 As in the US, beginning in the late 1980s,¹¹ this effort mobilised the hospitality industry to block meaningful tobacco control legislation to preserve the social acceptability of smoking and to protect industry profits. These programmes, known as Accommodation in the US and Courtesy of Choice in most parts of the rest of the world,^11,13,14,15 encourage the voluntary creation of smoking and non‐smoking sections in the hospitality industry as an alternative to legislation requiring 100% smoke‐free environments. Also, as in the US, the tobacco industry sought to present ventilation as the “solution” to SHS.¹⁶As of April 2007, 12 Latin American countries (Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela) had ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The FCTC, the first international public health treaty, calls for the implementation of “effective legislative, executive, administrative or other measures … at the appropriate governmental level to protect all persons from exposure to tobacco smoke” (Article 4.1) “in indoor workplaces, public transport, indoor public places and, as appropriate, other public places.” (Article 8).¹⁷ Given the fact that the only truly effective protection from SHS is the creation of 100% smoke‐free environments,¹⁸ in 2003, Venezuela approved a state law (in Monagas¹⁹) and between 2005 and 2006, Argentina passed and regulated two provincial laws (in Santa Fe and Tucumán) to establish 100% smoke‐free public places and workplaces. In March 2006, Uruguay became the first 100% smoke‐free country in the Americas. In response to this movement, one can expect the tobacco industry to accelerate its Accommodation efforts as a way of undermining such effective smoke‐free policies to implement FCTC.     

German tobacco industry's successful efforts to maintain scientific and political respectability to prevent regulation of secondhand smoke

Objective

To examine the tactics the tobacco industry in Germany used to avoid regulation of secondhand smoke exposure and to maintain the acceptance of public smoking.

Methods

Systematic search of tobacco industry documents available on the internet between June 2003 and August 2004.

Results

In West Germany, policymakers were, as early as the mid 1970s, well aware of the fact that secondhand smoke endangers non‐smokers. One might have assumed that Germany, an international leader in environmental protection, would have led in protecting her citizens against secondhand smoke pollution. The tobacco manufacturers in Germany, however, represented by the national manufacturing organisation “Verband” (Verband der Cigarettenindustrie), contained and neutralised the early debate about the danger of secondhand smoke. This success was achieved by carefully planned collaboration with selected scientists, health professionals and policymakers, along with a sophisticated public relations programme.

Conclusions

The strategies of the tobacco industry have been largely successful in inhibiting the regulation of secondhand smoke in Germany. Policymakers, health professionals, the media and the general public should be aware of this industry involvement and should take appropriate steps to close the gap between what is known and what is done about the health effects of secondhand smoke.     

Active smoking and secondhand smoke increase breast cancer risk: the report of the Canadian Expert Panel on Tobacco Smoke and Breast Cancer Risk (2009)

Four authoritative reviews of active smoking and breast cancer have been published since 2000, but only one considered data after 2002 and conclusions varied. Three reviews of secondhand smoke (SHS) and breast cancer (2004-2006) each came to different conclusions. With 30 new studies since 2002, further review was deemed desirable. An Expert Panel was convened by four Canadian agencies, the Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada and the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer to comprehensively examine the weight of evidence from epidemiological and toxicological studies and understanding of biological mechanisms regarding the relationship between tobacco smoke and breast cancer. This article summarises the panel's full report (http://www.otru.org/pdf/special/expert_panel_tobacco_breast_cancer.pdf). There are 20 known or suspected mammary carcinogens in tobacco smoke, and recognised biological mechanisms that explain how exposure to these carcinogens could lead to breast cancer. Results from the nine cohort studies reporting exposure metrics more detailed than ever/never and ex/current smoker show that early age of smoking commencement, higher pack-years and longer duration of smoking increase breast cancer risk 15% to 40%. Three meta-analyses report 35% to 50% increases in breast cancer risk for long-term smokers with N-acetyltransferase 2 gene (NAT2) slow acetylation genotypes. The active smoking evidence bolsters support for three meta-analyses that each reported about a 65% increase in premenopausal breast cancer risk among never smokers exposed to SHS. The Panel concluded that: 1) the association between active smoking and breast cancer is consistent with causality and 2) the association between SHS and breast cancer among younger, primarily premenopausal women who have never smoked is consistent with causality.     

Changes in hospitality workers' exposure to secondhand smoke following the implementation of New York's smoke-free law

Objective: To assess the impact on hospitality workers'' exposure to secondhand smoke of New York''s smoke-free law that prohibits smoking in all places of employment, including restaurants, bars, and bowling facilities. Design: Pre-post longitudinal follow up design. Settings: Restaurants, bars, and bowling facilities in New York State. Subjects: At baseline, 104 non-smoking workers in restaurants, bars, and bowling facilities were recruited with newspaper ads, flyers, and radio announcements. Of these, 68 completed a telephone survey and provided at least one saliva cotinine specimen at baseline. At three, six, and 12 month follow up studies, 47, 38, and 32 workers from the baseline sample of 68 completed a telephone survey and provided at least one saliva cotinine specimen. Intervention: The smoke-free law went into effect 24 July 2003. Main outcome measures: Self reported sensory and respiratory symptoms and exposure to secondhand smoke; self administered saliva cotinine specimens. Analyses were limited to subjects in all four study periods who completed a telephone survey and provided at least one saliva cotinine specimen. Results: All analyses were limited to participants who completed both an interview and a saliva specimen for all waves of data collection (n = 30) and who had cotinine concentrations ⩽ 15 ng/ml (n = 24). Hours of exposure to secondhand smoke in hospitality jobs decreased from 12.1 hours (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.0 to 16.3 hours) to 0.2 hours (95% CI –0.1 to 0.5 hours) (p < 0.01) and saliva cotinine concentration decreased from 3.6 ng/ml (95% CI 2.6 to 4.7 ng/ml) to 0.8 ng/ml (95% CI 0.4 to 1.2 ng/ml) (p < 0.01) from baseline to the 12 month follow up. The prevalence of workers reporting sensory symptoms declined from 88% (95% CI 66% to 96%) to 38% (95% CI 20% to 59%) (p < 0.01); there was no change in the overall prevalence of upper respiratory symptoms (p < 0.16). Conclusion: New York''s smoke-free law had its intended effect of protecting hospitality workers from exposure to secondhand smoke within three months of implementation. One year after implementation, the results suggest continued compliance with the law.     

我国乳制品工业创与闯的开路先锋——石家庄三鹿集团股份有限公司依靠科技创新发展现代奶业纪实

<正> 我们12亿人口的祖国,奶品生产和供应一直未能满足人民日益提高的生活需求。为了解决我国乳品短缺的难题,党和政府采取了许多优惠政策和利民措施,多少志士仁人为之呕心沥血,众多企业家和产业工人奋斗拼搏,创造了可歌可泣的辉煌业绩。石家庄三鹿集团股份有限公司就是其中的一个典型和缩影。     

Endotoxins in tobacco smoke: shifting tobacco industry positions.

In the 1980s, the tobacco industry started a campaign to divert attention away from secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) as a major source of indoor air pollution in workplaces by highlighting the roles of other indoor air pollutants. The industry, working through "third parties," highlighted endotoxins, naturally occurring substances that cause numerous inflammatory reactions in humans, as an alternative explanation to SHS as causing indoor air problems. In 1995, Hasday and colleagues were the first to present findings that cigarette smoke contains significant quantities of endotoxins. This discovery surprised tobacco industry scientists. The 1999 publication of the full Hasday et al. findings received only limited media attention but got the full attention of Philip Morris scientists concerned about a new public health issue and a new basis for regulation of workplace smoking by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which already regulated workplace endotoxin exposures from other sources. Philip Morris undertook an internal endotoxin research project to test the Hasday et al. findings and to determine if endotoxin-free cigarettes were possible. Although experiments were conducted to remove endotoxin from the tobacco, there is no evidence that they were successful. Following confirmation of SHS as an important source of endotoxins, the scientist promoting endotoxins as an important indoor air pollutant for the tobacco industry softened his position on the role of endotoxins as indoor pollutants. The presence of endotoxins in SHS provides an additional mechanism for the adverse effects of SHS that should be researched further, and the risk of exposure should be assessed.