XN The United :'states District Court

xN THE UNITED :`STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN .DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Civ'i1 Action'No . 96CV-5903,
$TEVEN R . . ARCH ; WILLIAM BARNES, ) .:

CIARAN McNALLY,• CATHERINE ;POTTS,°_ )
NORMA RODWELLER, BARBARA 'SALZMAN,
EDWARD J . SLIVAK'and JOHN ;_TEAaLE, )
Plaintìffe,
) Alan Rodgman,
) Ph .D .
THE . .AMERICAN'TOBACCO''COMPANY, )
INC ., et al ;, ) Volume 4,
) Pages 522 - 739
Defendants . )
)
- ---~ ------~---------
----------- -- _ _)
-
TRANSCRIPT of testimony as taken by and
before LINDA RUSSELL, :a Certified Shorthand
Reporter and Notary . Public of'the State of
North Carolina, at the offices of Womble Carlyle
Sandridge & Rice, :200 West Second Street,
Winston=Salem, North`Carolina, on Monday,
1997, commencing at . 9 :28 in the
forerioon .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 52 3
SUPREME -COURT .OF THESTATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YOR K
------- --- ------- -- --•-----------

PHYLLX,SSMALL and DENISE~FUBINI,
individuaJ.ly, and on behalf of )
others similarly situated, )
Plaintiffs ,
LOkILLARD TOBACCOCOMPANY, INC ., ) Index No .

LORILLARD, .INC .( LOEWS CORPOR .ATION, ') .110949/96
COUNCIL FOR TOBACCORESEARCH-USA, )
INC . (S,uccessor to .Tobacco Industry ~
Research Comma.ttee) ;, AND TOBACCO )
INSTITUTE, INC .-,
Defendants .
----- - --------0 .,-- --~ :. :--------- )
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YOR K

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
__._- ,.__....___ ..,.. .---------------

MARY ._ANN HOSKINS, Executrix of the )
Estate of Edwin Paul Hoskins, )
WALTINA'BROWN and DANTE AUBAIN, )
individually, and on behalf of )
others similarly eituated,, )
Plaintiffs ,
agains t
R .J .REYNOLDS TOBACCOCOMPANY, ) Index No .

RJR NABISCO, INC ., COUNCIL FOR ) 110951/96
TOBACCO. RESEARCH-USA,, INC . )
(Succeseorto Tobacco Industry )
Research Committee), AND TOBACCO
INSTiTUTE,` INC .,
Defendants .
--~---------------------- )
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 524
SUPREME COURT OF THE 'STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
-- -- ------ ---- -- -•±-------- ----- -- )

SHARLENE HOBERMAN and AUDREY HULSE, )
as Executrix, on behalf' ;of the )
Estate of Lewis Huise,' . .individually, )
and on behalf of othera .similarYy )
situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
- against - ) Index No .
) 110953/96
BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO -- )
CORPORATION, B .A .T . INDUSTRIES )
P .L .C ., BATUS, INC ., BATUS HOLDINGS, )
INC .,•`COUNCIL FOR :~OBACCO'RES ;EARCH- )
USA, INC . (Successor to'Tobacco )
Industry Research Committee), AND )
TOBACCO INSTITUTE, INC . )
Defendants . )
- --- -- - ----- - -- =-------------------- -- )
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
-- - -------------- - -- --------------)
ROSE FROSINA, ELIZABETH-COLAVITO and )
ANILDA ROSS, individually, and on )
behalf of others :similar3 .y situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
) 110950/96
PHILIP MORRIS, INC ., PHILIP MORRIS )
COMPANIES, INC ., COUNCIL,FOR TOBACCO )
RESEARCH-USA, .INC . (Successor to ) Ln
~
Tobacco Industry Research Committee) ) J
~
AND TOBACCO INSTITUTE, INC ., ) m
) ~
w
Defendants . )
am
----- ------ - -- - -- _-- - --------- -)
'WAaA &`SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . Pg . 525
SUPREME COURT OF THE ESTATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
-----•-- -----------------------------)
CATHERINE ZITO, PETER`HOBERMAN, )
and GEORGE ELISSEOU, individually, )
and .on behalf of othere similarly )
situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
- against - ) Index No
) 110952/96
THE AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY, INC ., )
AMERI:CAN,BRANDS, INC .`, COUNCIL FOR )
TOBACCO RESEARCH-USA,,INC . )
(Succ.esaqr to Tobacco 3ndustry )
Research_Committee), ANO fiOBACCO . )
INSTITUTE, INC ., )
)
Defendants . )
----------- .. ....------- .-----------=------- )
WAdA & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 526
A P P E A R A N C E S :
J . D . LEE, ESQ .
422 Gay Street
. .Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
For the Plaintiffe°in Pennsylvania case
(423) 544-0101
SHELLER, .LUDWIG & BADEY

3rd Floor
.1528 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102
8Y : STEPHEN A . SHELLER, ESQ .
SHERRICE A . KNISELY, ESQ .
For the Plaintiffs in Pennsylvania case
(215)_790-7300
`CLIMACO, CLIMACO, LEFKOWITZ &

~GAROFOLI CO ., L .P .A .
Ninth Floor, The Halle Building
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
. BY : JACK D . MAISTROS, ESQ .
For the .Plaintiffa in Pennsylvania case
(216) 621-8484
GOODKIND LABATON,RUDOFF & SUCHAROW L .L .P .

100 Park Avenue
New York, New, York ' 10 017
BY : MARTI S ANN . BRACHTL, ESQ .'_
For the Plaintiffs in New York case
(212) 907-0700
-WOMBLE CARLYLE :-SANDRIDGE & RICE

200 west Second Street
;Post Office Drawer 84
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27102
BY : MARTIN L .`HOLTON, III, ESQ . ~
For the Defendant R .J . Reynolds Tobacco Corp . ' w
(910) 721-3600, 00
WAGh,' .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 527
A P P E A R A N C E S (Continued)
JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE

Metropolitan .Square
1450 G Street N .W .
Waehington, D . C . 20005-2088
BY : :ROBERT-F . McDERMOTT, .JR ., ESQ :
''For the Defendant`R .J . Reynolds Tobacco Corp .
(202) 879~3939
MCCALL DOUGHTON & BLANCATO

633 West Fourth Street
Suite 150
BY : WILLIAM A . BLANCATO, .ESQ .
(910) 725-7531
For the witness Dr . Alan Rodgman
MILLER & MARTIN .

Suite 1000 Volunteer Building
832 Georgia Àvenue
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402
BY : MARCIA MEREDITH EASON, ESQ .
,,(423) 756-6600 .
For the Defendant'Lorillard Tobacco Company
WAG4A' & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 528
I N D E X
WITNESS REcR,osS REDIRECT RECROSS
ALAN'RODGMAN, Ph :D . .
Maistros'' 532
j X H_ I B I T S
PESCRIPTION IDENTIFICATION
Vol . 4, Pg . 529
VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going on the
2 record . The time is 9 :28 . This is the videotape
deposition of Alan Rodgman, Ph .D ., taken by the
4 plaintiff in the matters'of William P . Perry and
Sandra Perry, Plaintiffs, versus Brown &
Williamson Tobacco Corporation, ;et al .,
7 Defendants . Case number, civil action .2-473-95 .
8 Also the case Phyllis Small, et al .,
Plaintiffs, again .st Lorillard ;Tobacco Company,
10 Incorpora,ted,-et :al ., .Defendants . Index number
11
12 Plus the case of Mary Ann Hoskins,
13 et al . Plaintiffs, .against RJR Tobacco Company,
14 et al ., Defendants . Index number 110951/96 .
15 Plus'the case of Sharlene Hoberman,
16 et al ., Plaintiffs, against Brown & Williamson
17 Tobacco Corporation,>et al ., Defendants . Index
18 number 110953/96 .
19 Plup the case .of Rose Frosina, et al . I
20 Plaintiffs, against Philip Morris, Incorporated,
21 .et al ., Defendants . Index number .110950/96 .
22 Plus the case of Catherine Zito,
23 et al ., Plaintiffs, against the American Tobacco
24 Company, Incorporated,,et al ., Defendants . Index
25 number 110952/96 .
WAGA & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 530
This deposition is being held at the
2 offices of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, 200 --
MS : KNISELYs Excuse us . The main
4 caption is Arch .' This is what it --
VIDE04RAPHERa Okay, I have that also .
o.,, y o.u want -me to
. :KNISEL'Y :
8 VIDEOaRAPHER : Also the case of Steven
9 R . Arch, et al,, Plai,ntiffs, versus Brown &
10 Williamson Tobacco -~ excuse me, the American
11 Tobacco Company, Incorporated, et al ., Defendante .
12 This deposition is being held at the
13 offices of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, 200
14 West-Second,Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina .
15 M . ItNtSELY : Excuse me . Could you
16 read the full caption in Arch for us .
17 VIDEOGi2APHER : Okay . Do you want me
18 to start over?
19 MS . KNISELY : No .
20 VIDEOORAPHER : Arch, et al ., versus
21 the American Tobacco Company, et al . Case number
22 U,S . .District Court_EDPA 93-5903-CN .
23 This is Monday, August 4th, 1997 . My
24! name is John Girdler ; I'-m the video specialist .
25 The court_reportex is Linda Russell . We are here
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 531
r
in connection with ;Waga and Spinelli, with offices
located ,at' Four . . Be .cker= Farm Road, Roseland,
New Jersey .
Counsel will now state their
appearances f or"-the record, and'the court reporter
will ewearìn the witness .
MR . MAISTROS : Jack Maistros for the
pla3.ntiff .
MS .'KNISELY : Sherrice Knisely for the
10 plaintiffs in Arch .'
11 MR . LEE :
12
13 Martis Brachtl, here for
14 the plaintiffs in the New York actions Small,
15 Hoekins,' Hoberman, Froeina, and .Zito .
16 MS . :EASON : Marcia Eason for the
17 defendant Lorillard`Tobacco Company in the
18 Tennessee litigation, William and Sandra Perry
19 versus Brown & Will,iamson .
20 MR . BAG4LEY : Rick Bagley, legal
21 assistant for the -defendant .
22 MR . HOLTON : Mark Holton for RJR .
23 MR . MCDERMOTT : Robert McDermott for
24 Reynolds Tobacco Company .
25 MR . BLANCATO : Bill Blancato
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 532
representing Dr . . Alan Rodgman .
2 ALAN RODGMAN, Ph .D .,
having been first duly sworn, was examined and
4 did testify as follows :
EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY MR . MAISTROSs
8 you?`
10 R
11
12 Q
13 pleasurable experience .
14 My name is :'Jack Maistros and I
15 represent the plaintiffs in an action pending in
16 Pennsylvania . It's the Arch case .
17 I'm going ;to ask you a series of
18 questions today . If you don't understand my
19 questions, stop me . If you, want to confer with
20 your counsel, stop',me- . ',:If 'you want to go to the
21 me, ' okay?
22 A. Yes, sir .
23 Q . We're here,for your schedule as much
24 asèveryone elee's, and more so for yours,
25 probably .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 533
1 Who are you represented by .today?
2 Mr . William Blancato .
3 Q Is he your only counsel today?
Could :'you
full name for me .
7 My name is Alan Rodgman, A-L-A-N,
8 R-Or-D-G-M-A-N :
Q . Would you prefer Dr . Rodgman or
10 Rodgman?
11 Whatever you desire .
12 You are a doctor?
13 I m a Ph .D . in organic chemistry .
14 Q. Organic chemistry?
15
16 Q. What is your date of birth?
17 February the 7th, 1924 .
18 Q . Where`do you currently reeide?
19 A . 2828 Birchwbod Drive, Winston-Salem,
20 North Carolina .
21 Q Do you have any intentions, in the
22 of moving, relocating?
23 Not that I'know of .
24 Are you married?
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 534
1 Q . How long have .you been married?
A. F.ifty years on .June the 7th, 1997 .
Q . Is your 'wife' employed?
4 No .
5 Q . Do you have any children?
Yes .
Q . How many?
Three
MS . BRACHTL : Counselor, could you
10 speak up, .pleaee .
11 MR'. MAISTROS : Sure .
12 BY"MR . MAISTROS
13
14 49, 47, and 44 .
15 o any of your children work for
16 . Reynolds, or have they?
17{ All three have°worked for Reynolds in what
18 was .known as Reynolds Summer Program for children
19 of'dmployees,~loading boxcars, and so on and so
20 forth,` My youngest son is'a manager in personnel .
21 What- ' s,
22 Mark Rodgman .
23 manager,of personnel'trainingl
24' o either of your other two children
25 work full time for Reynolds, or have they?
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 535
Yes .
Q What years?
was in the"-Canadian Navy :£rom 1942 to 1945 .
4
10 was born' in
11
12 Q When did y
13 1954 . . But, before that, I'moved to Canada .
14
15 °'Twenty-six-years :'
16 Where ; clid you attend high school?
17 Toronto, Ontario,' Canada ; Humberside
18
19
20
21 Did you .
221
231 I went i
24 R
25

Vol . 4, Pg . 536
A . I entered the-University of Toronto in honors
chemistry .
4 Q
5 University of Toronto?
6 Eight yearsi .
7 Q, And what-degrees did you obtain?
Bachelor of arts in honors chemistry, and
master of arts in organic chemistry, and a Ph .D .
10 in-organic chemistries ; '49, '51, '53,
11 respectively .
12 Q . Up until 1953,` had you done any
13 work'related to or with a tobacco company?
14 A . No, I had not .
15 t2 Had any of your research involved
16 tobacco, in any fashion, up'to 1953?
17
18 Q What was'your first involvement with
19 tobacco?
20 A . When I was hired by R .J . Reynolds in 1954 .
21 Q . What '`month?
22 June the .23rd .~
23 Was that your first full-time
24 employment after 'college?
25
WAGA & SPINEhLI ` (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 537
2 Reynolds?
Well, I had a peculiar circumstance that, in
1941, I obtained a summer position at the
Banting & Best Department of Medical Research .
And for t .he summers, and then during the falls and
7 winters, I worked evenings and weekends, until I
got'my Ph .D .' in 1953 . Then I worked "full time at
9 the'Banting &<Best,Department of Medical Research .
10 Q . Where is the Banting & Best Department
11 f .Medical Research?
12 -Toronto, Ontario, Canada .
13 Q : What did you do there?
14 was involved in the study of
15 carcinogenesis . ;
16 S2 . How ;were you involved?
17 A. was a -- did_research .
18 What is "carcinogenesis?
19 Carcinogenesis is the,process whereby a
20 carcinoma is formed_ .,
21 0. What is a
22 Carcinoma is a tumor .
23 Did you do research on any specific
24 type types of tumors?
25 N
:WAGA' & `SPINELLI (201) 992-4111 .

Vol . 4, Pg . 538
materials that were used in the studies .
Q Did you have a major goal or theme of
your :research during that period of time?
A. The major'goal well,-my .major goal was to
synthesize the compounds that my professor there
material that'would act as a`'vaccine against
cancer .
10 certain compounds?
11 3t e s . That'a=what I was-there-for .
12 Q . Multiple-compounds? How many
13 compounds did you synthe'size?
14 Well, they,were :peculiar compounds in which
15 polycyclic hydrocarbon .`was'--linked to proteins .
16 And .I probably synthesized .-- to'be able to link
17 the,polycyclic to .the protein required a series of
18 reactions, and then the final reaction to do the
19 li:nking . And I probably did 10 or 15, I guess .
20 And, of :course, because the-material
21 wae being used in animal studies, I had to keep
22 making them again and again, because these studies
23 ran . -.f or many yeara .
24 And _what- is the -- what is the purpose
251 of making these synthesized compounds, as opposed

Vol . 4, Pg . 539
to using naturally .occurring compounds?
You couldn't find them naturally occurring .
Did you publish'any research?
Wheze was it published?
A . , :Sotrie of it was in the Journal of American --
jimerican''CYiemical Societv,'and some was in the
annual report of the Ontario Treatment and
Research Association, which was =- did the funding
10 of ,the work . Some of .it was published -- or
11 presented before various meetings . Canadian
12 Physiological Society,'I think, was one of them .
13 Q . And that was from '47 to '53?
14 Yes .
15 Q . How did your research progress in
16 terms of coming up with a vaccination?
17 . It wasn't too'succeseful .
18 Q Was`that research continued after you
19 left?
20 Yes .
21 Q•
22 No .
23 Q. . Why did ° :it ,stop?
24 A . Well, .my,professor, Dr . W . R . Franks, who was
25 .a cancer research professor at the University of
WAGA & :SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 540
1 Toronto, he eventually retired, and then, of
2 course, -_a couple of years ago he died .
4 Who was funding that research? Do you
4 know?
5 Ontario Treatment and Research Association,
think it's called . And some of it was funded by
7 the National Cancer Institute of Canada .
Q . Was there any specific type of cancer
that you were focused on, as opposed to just
10 cancer I general or tumors in general?
11 Well, it was the vaccine, if you want to call
12 it that . It was, you know, an attempt to find
13 something that would counteract the -- the effect
14 of polycyclic in -- polycyclice in animals .
15 4 What is a polycyclic?
16 Polycyclic compound is .one with more than one
17~
18 Poly
19' Each ring is
20 Q
21
22"
23 Q How are' .polycyclic compounds formed,
24 or how do they get in the animal's system?
25 A . Well, in the experimental work, they were
WAaA & SPINELLI , (201) 992-4111

Vol . , Pg . 54 1
injected into the animal .
2 Q . What type of animals?
A . Mice .
4 Q . Why did you use mice ?
A . Well, I had no control over what~beast was
used ; Dr . Franks was the one that selected the
7 mouse .
Q . Didyou ever use any other type of
animals ?
10 A . Some of the people in the group were studying
11 what was called Rous sarcoma, which occurs in
12 chickens . So they used chickens .
13 Q Is there some product or proces s
14 whereby the average person would be able to relate
15 what polycyclic compounds come out of or ar e
16 created by? I mean, why -- how -- why do yo u
17 focus on polycyclic compounds ?
18 MR .'MCDERMOTT : Object to the form of
19 the question .
20 THE WITNESS : Well, as I say, I was
21 doing a job for the professor . But, at that point

;Ln
-
22 ,in .time, 1947, polycyclic hydrocarbons were quit e

I m
23 rampant in the gasoline exhaust, the foods yo u
w
Ln
24 -exhaus effluents .from your W
25 coal-fired furnaces,- ;-oi1-fired furnaces, gas-fire d
WAGA & SPINELL I (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 542
furnaces, tires that are being worn out on the
that they were in tobacco or tobacco smoke?
about°°the`--: 1950, after some of the
9 epidemiological s.tudies resu3 .ts were published,
10 there-'was an effort-to f4gure out . And then
11 Dr . :Wynder had his mouse ski .n painting work, to
12 find'out if there was .-,- what was in the cigarette
13 smoke . And of course they concentrated on the
14 po3.ycyclic hydroca,rbons right .away, starting in, I
15 gueds, '51/'52 .
16 Q . "They" ;; w o is they?
17 People in . the scientists around the world
18 were -- looked at it,' an .d'`primarily because of the
19 tremendous background on the polycyclic
20 hydrocarbons that had :begun'in 1931 .
21 By who? .
22
23
i &
24 hydrocarbons?
25 would say,- if you categorize them into
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 543
different types, there ;;are ::probably about 75
different types of polycyclic hydrocarbons . Of
course,,one of the classifi-catione .,ia whether they
have two rings, three .ringp, four rings, five,
And
Q . Are theyàll,carcinogenic?
7 No . In fact, someòf them are
non=carcinogenic, and eome of them will offset the
effect of carcinogenic .hydrocarbone .
10 Q . Are there
11 MS . KNIS.ELY :
12 minute? want to talk with you for a second, if
13 we-can go off the record .
14 MR . MAISTRQS_ :
15 VIDEOQRApHER :
16 record at 9 :48 a .m .
18 a .m .
vIDE00RAPHER :
20 record at 9 :52 a :m .
21 BY`MR . MAISTROS :
22'~ Q
23 talking about .polycyclic hydrocarbons . Let me ask
24 you, first of all, of the 75 different types that
25 you`said existed ; some are cancer-producing ; is
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 544
that correct?
Yes . In mice -- or animals .
{~ . If I use'the phrase "carcinogenic," do
you equate that ;:with cancer-producing or not?
. Carcinoma-p'ro'ducing .
Q, Of t :he 75 different types, are they
carc,inogenic or carcinbma-producing?
A . It depends on how you'adminiater them . There
are some polycyclic .hydrocarbons which are not
10 tuntorigenic . There are some that, if you
11 administer them one way, they will cause a
12 carcinoma, by skin painting, and another one, if
1. 3 you inject them, it will cause a sarcoma . And
14 some, ;if ;you feed them, they don't cause anything .
15 o the term tumorigenic or
16 carcinogenic is dependent on about 50 factors that
17 have to be,tàken into account .
18 Q inlhether .it's carcinogenic, tumorigenic
19 or carcinoma-producing, is the end result cancer?
20 Well, if you're"talking tumorigenic, not
21 neceaearily so, be-cause the tumorigenic compound
22 could cause_a papilloma, which is not is a
23 benign .tumor, which is not considered a cancer .
241 `Q . What is the major alleged link between
25 polycyclic hydrocarbone and tobacco smoke?
WAC3A&'BPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 545
1 MR . I4CDERMOTT= Object to the form of
the question .
BY MR .'=MAISTROS :
If you .could survey the literature
and .- not holding you to -- from a scientific
standpoint, this opinion . I'm asking you, out of
th,e .literature out there, the major alleged link
-bettaeen polycyclic hydro -- or polycyclic
hydrocarbons,'tobacco'amoke and disease, what is
10 the alleged link?
il MR ._BLANCATOt Object to the form .
12 MR . MCDERMOTT Object to the form .
13 THE WZTN$SSs You're talking now, or
14 1954, or '55?
15 BY MR . MAISTROS t
16 Q Let
17 A . Well, in'view of the evidence that's been
18 cQllected over the last 40 years, the~aasociation
19 between polycyclic h,ydrocarbons and cigarette
20 smoking disease in smokers is very tenuous .
21 s the alleged link between polycyclic

Ln
22 hydrocarbons and smoking a carcinogenic effect, ~

..m
23 tumor-producing effect? What is it? w
Ln
,-J
24 MR . MCDERMOTT : Object to the form .
25 Compound .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 546
1 BY MR . :MAISTROSs
Q . I want to just understand, for th .e
next:`couple of days, if I use the word
"tumor-producing' or "carcinogenic" or
"cancer-producing," we re,not missing each other
6 in the night because I'm thinking one thing and
7 you're thinking another . Is`there some agreed
upon format we can use that you're comfortable
9 'w .ith?
10 Yes . If you' .re going,to use the term
11 "carcinogenic" or "tumorigenic" or "sarcogenic," I
12 think you should be aware of what goes into
13 determining'that effect .
14 And, for example, the effect of a
15 compound is species-dependent . Things that happen
16 in mice cannot happen in ra,ts, do not happen in
17 rabbits, guinea pigs, or monkeys, dogs . And you
18 may have eomething_happen in a,rat that doesn't
19 happen in a mouee :
20 Tumorigenici :t,y a.~e also
21
22 animal won! t 'may not happen in a male, and vice ;

i
23 versa . Tumorigenicity is also dependent on the
24 age ;of the animal, .what happens when you've got a i
25 six-week-old mouseland you start the experiment
WAaA` .&,SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 547
versus what happens when you've got a year-old
2 mouse . You can tell -- you may get entirely
3 different reactions .
4 The other thing is the mode of
administration . ;Whether it's skin painting ;
varioue types of irijection, intravenous,
intraperitoneal, .subcutaneous injection --
8 Q . Those are factors that affect --
9 inhalation .
10 Those are factors that affect the
11 tumorigenicity, ;if, you :will,
12 .Right .
13 Q . -- the compound .
14 What_ Y
15 assume, .• . .1
16
17 Well, tumorigenic is an all-encompassing
18 word .
19 That's
20 looking °for the al .l -encompassing word that I can
21 use,,that you're comfortable with, that is an

I
22 alleged adverse health risk related to polycyclic
23 hydrocarbons . What's the broadest word you can

,
24 think of today?
25 A . Well, tumorigeneaie would be one . But I say,
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 548
even<vin that case,'you've got to take into account
the factors I was trying to tell you about and
Q . ' I , apologize`.
6 -administration .makee_a,great :deal .of difference,
whether it's the substance administered neat or in
solution ; and it depends on the kind of solution,
the .+concentration, and so on .
10 Men are :not,mice type theory?
11 Yes . You,probably read that'I had written
12 that someplace, `but I` plagiarized it . If you want
13 to find-out where it is, look in something Ernest
14 Wynder wrote .
15 Q I like that quote, though .
16 Well, in that case, I'm sorry I wasn't
17 the .inventor .
18 Q. I wi11 t
19 "tumorigenesis .°',And if I ask you a question in
20 the future, that<you think it's not accurate
21 because .•I'm not using the right phrase, I'd like
22 .you to interrupt me and tell me, okay?
23
24 I
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 549
doing from 147 to 153, was there a particular type
f tumorigenesis you were looking at?
We were looking . :at the -- .there ,are four
polycyclic hydrocarbons that,_ .from -- after
1932 -- well, actually 1931, that, when they were
syntheeized,or,isoi .ated .from something identified,
th-en synthesized, there'were four polycyclic
hydrocarbons'that are considered the most potent

.,
available :' Dibenz ia ; h] anthracene
10 Okay .
11 benefit, and`partially mine, if you could do these
12 long words slower, okay?
13 . Okay . Dibenz[a,h]anthracene, and those are
14 square parens, too . ; benzo[a]pyrene ;
15 3-methylcholanthrene ;
16 7, 1,2-dimethylbenz Ta] anthracene . And the "All is in
17 brackets, .
18 What :do you mean by "most potent"?
]. 9 Well, if you were to look at a eeries of
20 hydrocarbons, you get -- polycyclic hydrocarbons,
'21, you .get some .that aren'.-t active at all, some are
22 very slightly active . In other words, you may get,(„
23 o ne : t u m o r i n a t h ous ari d mi ce . B u t , those four , at m
24 thee right concentration in the right beast and I W
25 administered in the right .way, will cause a large

Vol . 4, Pg . 550
percent of tumor-bear,ing animals . And they're
used~many times as standards .
6 o that ; even?
-We11, dibenz [a, hlanthracene was ' f irst found
to be`tumorigenic in 1931 . It was synthesized by
9 Dr .•Fieser at Harvard and found to be tumorigenic
10 by Kennaway in England .
11 Q . In what beast?
12 Mouse .
13 0 How about benzo [a] pyrene? .
14 It'was isolated from coal tar in 1932 by
15 W . Cook and his colleagues . He isolated it,
16 proved its-structure by-synthesis and then showed
17 thatt it, was tumorigenic in mice .
18 Q
19 I forget the exact date'about
20 -methylcholanthrene . But the interest in
21 3-methylcholanthrene is that, for years, from 1935
22 to 1950, people : were looking at
23 -methylcholanthrene because, if you heat food
24 stuffs containing cholesterol -- cholesterol is
251 structurally similar to 3-methylcholanthrene

Vol . 4, Pg . 551
there-was a likelihood or a theory that you would
get 3-methylcholanthrene in your food stuffs . And
that was the reason :for the high level of cancer
f -the stomach in the United States versus places
like Japan that very`seldom had cooked meat or
things with cholestero,l in it that were cooked .
How about dimethylbenzla]anthracene?
Well, that was .-actually .the -- that was
started about the 1950s . 'it actually was thought
10 to, be just a .straight synthetic compound, until it
11 was found in .a l,ot of things, food stuffs . And,
12 of course, it is found in tobacco smoke ; but it's
13 a very small amount .
14 Q . These four, what .you've described as
15 the most potent polycyclic hydrocarbons, is that
16 still true today, that those are the,four most
17 potent?
18 would sl! y yes
19 of that, becaub+e .there `have been writings that
20 maybe an individual coimpound might be more potent
21 than`those . But .those'four have been used in so
22 many experimental systems that, if you're going to
23 do an experiment in tumorigenesis and you want a
24 control, you might pick, :=one of those four, because
25 you've got something'like 50/60 years of

Vol . 4, Pg . 552
background to fall'back o
- And'the object, during an animal
experiment, is .you always have what's`called a
positive control, which`would include maybe one of
these four, And if something went wrong with a
certain concentration and mode of administration,
and .you didn't get .the percent tumor-bearing
animals that you usually got, you knew you were
doing the experiment wrong and you better look at
10 your procedure :' Were your technicians doing the
11 skin painting properly, or was the solution right,
12 or so on and 'so forth .

,. . :
13 Q . Now, when you say that they were --
14 these four .were known to produce tumors back in
151 the '30s,-'31/'32, is that a specific type of
16 1 tumor? The same`for all four?
17 A . Well, here,again, if you skin paint
18 benzpyrene, I'm sure -- we might as well stick
19 with that, because that's the one you're going to
20 rattle on about for the next few days .
21 Benxola]pyrene, if you paint it on the
22 skin, will-causeà carcinoma of the skin . But if
23 you inject it subcutaneously, it causes a sarcoma .'N

m
24 If you administer it by -inhalation, it doesn't
25 cause anything .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 553
1 Q . Are there percentages that have been
attached to these different polycyclic
3 hydrocarbons, such as 80 percent of the mice that
.are, skin painted with particular ones have
developed-tumore, or 90'percent0
6 Well, it depends on the concentration, sir .
could -- D
experiments in 1957 ;-_showed that you could start
with a certain concentration of benzo [a] pyrene
10 solution and paint mice`with a certain
11 coneentration, cut it in half, cut it in half, cut
12 it in half, and paint different groups with the
13 solutions, and .you got to a point where you had a
14 level of benzo[a]pyrene_in solution that didn't
15 cause any tumore : But that level was 300 times
16 what's in a normal cigarette . .
17 That was'out of Dr . Wynder's lab in
18
19 That would' b
20 aseume1 ` y
21 A. In the tar from 300 cigarettes . He has the
22 precise figures in there ; it may be 280, it may be
23 320 but it :'was cloae .to 300 .
24 Q So there's'a certain minimum level
25 that has been discovered of - of at least some o
WAGA& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 554
these polycyclic hydrocarbons, at which they do
.not, promote --
3 -Every one tested has aminimum thresh -- has
a threshold,limit value .
that you were talking about had about as much
as you need 300 cigarettes to equal?
8 A . Benzo [a7 pyrene :
Q : Why are they referred to as "most
10 potent"? I mean, how would a,layman understand as
11 to why they're the mos`t potent? Do they all cause
12 som'p form of ;tumors at some levels?" Are they just
13 biologically more active?
14 No . As I just finished telling you, they
151 don't, .cause it at al1`levels . It is the fact
161 that, if you were'to-administer a certain number
17 of millimoles of benzpyrene versus a certain
181 number -- the same number of .millimoles of, say,
19 benzoCa]anthracene,'which is a borderline
20 tumorigenic, if it'sà tumorigenic at all . Then,

Ln
~
21 at a .given concentration, say, benzo[a]pyrene ~
m
22 might produce 8fl_percent tumor-bearing animals, ,~
. w
23 and benzo[a]pyrene (aic) may produce 2>percent at ;~
24 the same concentration .
25 Andìt was found that those four, at a
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, g 555
r
certain concentration, always produced the
2 highers, versus everything else that was tested .
Q• Are all "four of those,polycyclic
hydrocarbons you mentioned in tobacco smoke?
As far as I know, 3-methylcholanthrene has
neve,.r been found in -- well, it's been found in
cigaret-te smoke but never confirmed . A man in
8 Germany called :Krt511er reported it, but there was
some question about the accuracy of his
10 identification . Dietrich Hoffmann and Ernest
11 Wynder disagreed with his identification .
12 Q . Do you know when the other three were
13 discovered to be in tobacco smoke?
14 A . Well, as I mentioned before, there was a big
15 controversy about whether the_polycyclics were in
16 cigarette smoke, and that controversy rattled on
17 between '51, '52, 'S3 . And even as late as 1957,
18 f.or example, for benzo[aJpyxene :, Dr . .Fieser, who
19 was :probably one'of the two great-polycyclic
20 hydrocarbon chemists,in this country, did not
21 agree wit .h the evidence indicating benzopyrene was
22 in cigarette smoke : His own staff could not find
23 it, yet they could find it in coffee .

&
24 Q . Who's the other great polycyclic
25i
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 556
Melvin NewmanàtÒhio State . I believe he's
Those are -- polycyclic wizards in
almost every_country . : J . W . Cook in England, whom
I have mentioned ; Clar, in Germany, wrote several
big, huge books on polxCyclics . The French had
Lacassagne ; that's L-A-C-A-S-S-A-G-N-E ; and a
Vietnamese called Buu-Hoi, B-U-U, hyphen, H-O-I .
8 So each country had somebody who was doing
p.olycyclic hydrocarbon-~work, from 1931 to probably
10 the war time ; everything was interrupted by the
11 war .
12 Q . And who was America's?
13 `Melvin Newman at Ohio State and Louis Fieser
14 at Harvard . And Louis Fieser, of course, was the
15 chemist who did ;this chapter on cigarette smoke in
16 the :1964' ;Surgeon General's report :' . .
17 The three hydrocarbons that -- is it
18 generally accepted,they're in cigarette smoke, the
19
20 as' I'said, after --ìn '57, because
21 Fieser wouldn't accept the evidence, there
22 was -- that was in the literature, there was a big ~
23 push to definitely identify them . And the -- I
24 guess the culminating thing was, in 1959,
251 Dr . Wynder and Hoffmann'published -• gave a

Vol . 4, Pg . 557
presentation and s.aid ; Well, .here's absolute
proof that it's' .from it's in-cigarette smoke .
3 And they showed a pictu,re of some-crystals of
ben,zo [a7 pyrene, which I' m sure they found .
5 So after ;.i67/'58, everybody accepted
th'at it was there` . 8ame as everybody accepts it's
in .your toast this morning .
Q . S forgot my toast . I did get my
oatmeal, but they forgot ~ the toast .
10 The .levels you mentioned, I'm sure
11 there's a minimum threehol .d you have to get to
12 before it .is tumor promoting . As you said, for
13 benzo [a] pyrene ,you need 300 cigarettes?
14 no .
15 With cigarettes ;~he backed off on solutions of
16 pure benzo {a] pyrene ;: And when he got to an
17 equiv;alent that-wae .many"times what was in the
18 cigarette tar that he usually used, he didn't get
19 any .
20
21 sure you may be aware .that Dr . Wynder,
22 Dr . Hof fmann, `-Fred .Bock :, Ben j amin Van Duuren and
23 Alvin Kosak have repeatedly written that, in the
24 skin painting studies with cigarette smoke tar,
25 the polycyclic hydrocarbons, as a class, can
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 558
explain no more .than,two and :a half percent of the
And J'. W . Cook, Fieser, .everybody, has
.said, for 50 years, .you oannot explain the
observed response by the polycyclid hydrocarbons .
And if you look in the -' 79 .Surgeon General, the
'82 Surgeon General the
all say the same thing .
10 To .add something to this business
11 about the controversy : From '51, that area --
12 that :time period, I ;personally couldn't understand
13 why there was a'controversy . Because, from 1935
14 to 1950, every material that was --'had an organic
15 compound, whether,,iaas chicken` wings, or steak, or
16 isoprene, or methane, or simple organic`compounds,
17 every one that was heàted at a temperature above
-'18 500 degrees gave :a series .of polycyclics .
19 Q . In the ;'work' you were doing, which is
20 where`we started, from,'47 to ',53, were you
21' focusing on these four polycyclic hydrocarbons?
22 Well, focusing on`thope, plus another one,
23 benzo [a] anthracene, ` which 'ie actually in smoke
24 too . It'sà borderline tumorigenic . In fact,
25 there'are probably as many reports in the

Vol . 4, Pg . 559
literature that it's non-tumorigenic than there
are ; that" says , it s very mildly tumorigenic .
I also °some of my work involves
eome,other .things besides'polycyclic hydrocarbons
5 There's nitrogent~mustards that are tumorigenic
6 compounds, and I was involved with those .
Q~
mustards?
9 We want -- there was
10 that,- if you had linked a compound -that was
11 tumorigenic to another one'that was,tumorigenic,
12 would you get addition,'synergism or cancellation?
13 And ;I was interested in the fact that -- of
14 hooking a nitrogen mustard to a polycyclic
15a hydrocarbon and made a,series,of those compounds .
16 And,they really acted like the
17 polycyclic . Nitrogen mustard had very little
18 influence, because nitrogen mustard, as you
19 .probably are aware,' ;_for some years was used to
20 treat leukemia in .children .
21 Q . What other research were you doing '47,

Ln
22 53? ~
~
23 Well, one of the things that did prove useful i m
w
J
24 later was -- other than my experience with
25 polycyclic hydrocarbons, was my -- 'Professor
(201 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 560
Franks had a good frie.nd ;who was head of the
medical department_ot a large U .S . corporation .
They were having some"problems,with -= and asked
us to do f ind òut~ wh'at wae the problem in a
5 tarry-like substance that .was .being emitted from
6 equipment . And I developed a,procedure to look at
7 it .
It_was,obvious, very quickly, that it
contained polycycl#,c'<hydrocarbons .c I developed a
10 procedure, based - I pay :"developed ;" :I combined
11 two procedures that were in the literature : That
12 >f .J . W . Cooky~ and`hie work on the isolation of
13 polycyclics from coa3, tar, with a procedure called
14 column chromatograpliy,''and developed a procedure
15 o .tsolate polycyclic hydrocarbons from a complex
16 mixture .
1 7_: It was a much easier procedure, much
18 si.tnpler than the'one Cook had used .- And, of
19 course, you got to remember, in 1931 there was
20 very little known about -- they' .didn't'know what
21 they .were looking for, for one thing . And they
22 started with two tons of coal tar . .
23 © What 'company was this?
24 The company in the United States?
25 Yes .
WAaA & SPINELLI" (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 561
I m not at liberty to'tell you that .
2 This was -- you signed a
confidentiality agreement?,_
My boss did . Well,_it was one'of those
f;riendship things .
A. Well, as I say,- ;there seemed to be a problem
with=a --`the tar emitted from the equipment they
10 were ueing and the effect on the ekin of some of
11 the workers .
12 Q . Was the problem solved?
13 A . I have no idea . I just gave the results to
14 my boss, and he transmitted them to liis friend,
15 and .I don't know .w.hat wa ;s done with them .
16 Q . And the reeearch you did for that
17 particular projeCt-•was to .identify the polycyclic
18 hydrocarbons
19 Well, to see if they'were there, and it was a
20 .good guess that they were . And I did identify
21 some of them . There we're a_whole series, startin

Ln
~
~
22 with-naphthalene, N-A-P-H-T-H-A-L-E-N-E,
!N
m
23 anthracene, benzpyrene, benzanthracene . . They were ~
w
~
24 all : there . . w
25 4 And what kind . jof `skin problems was the
WAC3A : & SPINELLI

Vol . 4, Pg . 562
1 tar;,causing : for the ' employees?
2 I have no_idea,` sir .
whatever happened to that issue, or -
today?
8 Yes .
Q-
10 work?
11 A . When I came .to Reynolds, I was given a
12 project to do, which I did, and whichènded . Then
13 I was asked whatÌ :would like to :work on ; which I
14 was-a little surprised, because usually you're
15 told,what you're'to work on . And I said : Well,
16 in view of all the stuff that's .going on in the
17 literature, I think`we should look at cigarette
18 smoke . They said" ; Go ahead ._
19 And, of course, with all this
20 'controversy on polycyclic hydrocarbons and having
21 a method to determine"them or isolate and separate

Ln
22 them, we set up a smoking system that matched, as
23 near as we could, the one that Dr . Wynder
24 described in his 1953 paper on the skin painting
25 work, the Wynder, Graham and Croninger paper .

Vol . 4, Pg . 563
1 looked at that .diagram and built a smoking machine
2 as :close to that as we could, from the diagram,
and used .the same smoking regime that'Dr . Wynder
had used, which he had said simulated the human
smoking eyetem ; ."whichy it .,really didn't . He used
three puffs per minute, which nobody used at that
7 time ; but we copied that .
And looking at the -- putting my
procedure through the` the cigarette smoke, we
10 isolated and identified polycyclic hydrocarbons in
11 cigarette smoke .
12 Q . Before we'get to Reynolds, the work
13 you were doing from '47, .to '53 was -- the end goal
14 was to develop a vaccine for cancer-promoting or
15 cancer -- tumor-p`ro .moting-.compounds?
16 . A . Tumor-initiated .
17 Q . And between '47 and '53, you weren't
18 doing research to see if the compounds were
19 tumor-producing,youu were doing research to figure
20 outà solution to combat the tumor-promoting
21 compounds, correct? Ln
~ 1
~
22 . That's right . . ~
~ m
23 Q . You took it :as a given, between '47 w
J
Ln
24 and ."53, that certain`polycyclic hydrocarbons were
25 cancer or tumor promoting, correct?
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 56 4
vaccine for animals or_humans ?
Well, I thin k
in hope that, if there was a correlation_between
tumorigenicity in animals and .the tumorigenicit y
8 in humans,,that it would .work in humans .
Q . Did :you do
10 53 ?
11 My work was all chemistry, sir .
12 Q . Did anyone .in your laboratory, eithe r
13 Franks or anyone else, do you'know if they studie d
14 any,polycyclic hydrocarbon effect on humans ?
15 . ' No , they da.dn' t :
16 Q . They did not ?
17 coupl e
18 history, .sir .
19
20 are subjected to polycyclie hydrocarbons and watc h
2 1 them, over a period of °time, to see what happens ?

Ln
22 For e :xample, yo u mentioned that, I ~_A
23 th.i;nk, polycyclic-hydrocarbons are' prevalent i n
24 some fuels . Has a'nyone ever done etudies to look
2 5, at :re.finery workers, over a period of,time, to see
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 565
if there's_any correlation with .the animal
studies?
~A . Well,"you have a problem with -- in some
instances, of compari'eon . °zf you'r,e .looking at
po],ycyclics and the 'effect on skin ;i if somebody
gets stuff on the skin,` tar or oi1 .'or whatever,
you may get somewhat the sajme` effect : But one of
the problems has been that, on inhalation, the --
it's~been, I,think, .very .rare circumstance has
10 anybody ever beon abie to produce lung tumor in
11 animals with inhalation of a polycyclic
12 hydrocarbon .
13 Q . I'm just asking you if you're aware of
14 any'long-term-or short-term studies that were done
15 on humans that were eubjected to polycyclic
16 hydrocarbons in the'environment .
17 No . But there was a study done in Italy,
18 before the war, 1937/'38, by Cottini,
19 C-O=T-T-I-N-z, .'and Mazzone, M-A-Z-Z-O-N-E,
20 which' they actually painted human -beings with
21 solutions of polycyclic hydrocarbons that had
22 produced tumors in animals . I .think the skin
23 painting went on for fouròr`- .five months . I
24 believe it was done .with prisoners . And I believe

,.
25 it`was terminated when -- Labor'Day of 1939, when

Vol . 4, Pg . 566
war ..was dec'lared`between Great Britain, Canada,
Germany, Italy, and'the prisoners were shipped
into the Italian Army .
Q . Was this published research?
Q . Do you know if there were any
7 conclusions drawn as to .a,ny analogies that can be
made to the animal skin painting?
I don't think it`ran .long enough . I think it
10 only` ran three o,rr four months .
11 Q . When you'were doing your studies in
12 147 to '53, was it a11 .:-skin painting?
13 No . Well, I didn't do any of the skin
14 painting . I saw a lot of it . I would say there
15 were, :eome injection -- the vaccine thing was
16 tested on skin-painted animals, on
17 inttaperitoneally-injected animals,-on intra --
18 eubcutaneously-injected animals,
19 . .in't•ravenously- :injected animals . And, of course,
20 work going on_there did -- as I said before, there
21 wae one small .,group under Dr . Franks, .working on
22 the ;Rous sarcoma with chickens . Rous sarcoma is a
23 virus-caused tumor .
24 0 Was there a
25,1, period, was there a generally scientifically

Vol . 4, Pg . 567
1 accepted method of doing this testing, skin
guessing?
4 A :-, No . If you were
there was a pretty well-set protocol . If you were
doing subcutaneous injection, there was a
defined -- fairly well defined protocol . And that
wasiprobably due to when I was running through all
9 that stuff about-the`factors that influence
10 tumorigenesis . Between "31 and 1941 --- '31 was
11 when .i'-the first polycyclic hydrocarbon tumorigenic
12 for mouse skih`was found, and then '32 was the
13 benzpyrene in coal tar .
14 Between that time, people were
15 -synthesizing polycycliO hydrocarbons in all
16 directions, different structures, ones with methyl
17 groups dangling on them and two methyl groups,
18 three methyl groups .' And they were painting them
19 on mice, and making all sorts of wild claims . And
20 a man who was a very noted cancer .research
21 specialist in polycyclic hydrocarbons and other
22 tumorigens, Dr . . Murray .Shear -- I don't know if he
23 worked for the National Cancer Institute or the
24 predecessor of the National -- but he was asked to
25 write an article to put all this mees in
WAaA & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, g 568
And he
Shear and Leiterr are-the authors, in which he went
through-'and described,all the intricacies of
tumorigenesis atudies, : ;`whatl it : all meant, and so
on .and eo forth .'
7 work he had done'came the procedure, for example,
in ekin painting, that=you had various groups of
mice . Òne you''called .the cage control, and all
10 you did was put them in a cage, 100 mice or 50,
11 whatever number you wanted to use, put them in six
12 to a-cage or something, and you fed them and gave
13 them water and'cleaned their cage up every day .
14 And,then you had what'was called the
15 solvent control ; you had a group of mice that
16 you -- on the shaved surface of their.a:.back, you
17 painted them with the solvent . Th,en ;you had a
18 positive control, benzpyrene,or whatever,
19 that you_wanted to<use, maybe one of the four that
20 I talked about,
21 pai.nt'ed the back with

Ln
22 Then whatever your test, material was, :I-
N
23 was~'the subsequent ;groupst
24 different materials,you were'testin_g
251 ten groups painted the`same way as you did with
WAGA' &,. SPINEL .L,I (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 569
1 the benzpyrene positive control .
So it was all fairly well set out that
3 way . And of course, one of the interesting things
4 is that when you all -- everybody talks about
carcinogenicity and tumorigenicity . If you look
in"`the government documents that cataloged the
7 compounds that were tested for tumorigenicity,
8 that book was first published in 1947 and the
second edition in '51, and then .another one in
10 '57, and it keeps on going . It's now -- if you
11 had them'all-together_here, they'd be as wide as
12 this-table, all stacked side-by-side . But in the
13 first 25 years,òne of the'compounds that was used
14 as the solvent was benzine .
15 And in the solvent controls, the -- I
16 didn't look at all the books some time ago, when
there was a big fuss=about benzine . But as far as
I know, there are only three-tumors that ever
appeared in something like 11,000 animals painted
with benzine . Now is that tumorigenic or not
21 tumorigenic?
22 Q . Which three tumors? ~

~
J
~
23 Pardon? m
~
Which three tumors? w
24 Q OD
~
251 A . Well they were all the same type, as I

Vol . 4, Pg . 570
1 recall . I've forgotten what they called -- it had
a weird name .
3 Q You mean three tumors, or three types
f'tumors, or three :gpecific tumors?
A .. No, three animals had tumors, and I don't
know what the tumor type- ;was, out of thousands of
animals tested that way .
8 0
9 A .
10 What à-tudy are you referring to?
11 Ve11, I say, in many studies benzine was used
12 as .the solvent . And the solvent control, if
13 benzine had been ag tumorigenic as some people
14 claim, you,certainly :would have found more than
15 three in 20 years out of the thousands and
16 thousands of animals treated .
17 Q Is therea'a :specific paper that I could
18 .identify or go'to that would summarize the
19 majority of the work you did from '47 to '53?
20 A . (Witnese shakes head .) No .

Ln
21 Q. Are :there .specific titles of those r
_J
N
~
22 papers you recall, as you sit here today, that I
~
w
23 could look up? 00
N
24 Well, as I-- ohe of them, I think -- the one
251 that' .s in the Journal gf American Chemical Society
WAGA & SPINELLI- (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 571
is a compound :I prepared with -- linking thyroxine
to .dibenzanthracene .
Thyroxin, of course, is the active
amino .acid that's .in`your thyroid . But I think
someplace you' mua`t have -- in all this stuff I've
given you, you must .have a copy of all my
publications .
Even prior~ .to Reynolds?
You have everything I've ever written that
10 has been,published . Or presented at meetings .
11 Which I'gather you :mustn't have looked at .
12 Q . And, again, up until '53, none of your
13 specific research focused on tobacco or tobacco
14 smoke?
15 None of my`work at the Banting Institute
16 nor :`my work in the chemical department nor my
17 master's or my Ph .D . or -- my bachelor's degree
18 might -- you .might say : Well . . .
19 As it turned out years later, might
20 have had .-- been connected or had an indirect
21 connection .
22 But when I told you I was involved in' ;
23 an honors chemistry course in the University of
24 Toronto, the University of Toronto is different
251 Ontario universita.es are different from those in

Vol . 4, Pg . 572
1 the rest of Canada and in the United States, that,
2 when you take what's called an honors course,
particularly in science, the first three years you
take nearly all the-courses that you have to take
to graduate . Your fourth year you may have one or
two courses . And the rest of the time in your
fourth year you were assigned a research project ;
8 it's .sort of a mini master's .
9 And they believe, at the University of
10 Toronto, . that you should not graduate from an
11 .honors chemistry course or honors physics without
12 knowing how to do research . And my project for my
13 bachelor's degree was to develop a procedure to
14 prepare unsymmetrical hydrazines . The Canadian
15 government was interested in unsymmetrical
16 hydrazines because they were very fine -- thought
17 they :would be a very fine rocket fuel .
18 We1l, to get unsymmetrical hydrazines,
19 what you needed to ;do was to make -- first get a
20 nitrosamine, and then reduce it to the hydrazine .
21 So I prepared, the Canadian
22 government, and it_became part of my bachelor's
23 thesis, if you will, pounds of dimethyl
24 nitrosamine, half of'which I converted to dimethyl
25 hydrazine . And of course, at the time I did this

Vol . 4, Pg . 573
1 work, 1948/49, dimethyl nitrosamine was not known
2 to be tumorigenic . : It was only discovered in 1956
3 that it was-tumorigenic . But I guess I was lucky,
because I probably made 25 pounds of dimethyl
5 nitrosamine . .> I .'.m still here .
6 Q
And how is that arguably related to
tohacco or tobacco smoke?
10 . In 1963/64 two guys in -- two gentlemen in
11 South Africa said dimethyl nitrosamine was in
12 cigarette smoke .
13 Q Who were those two?
14 . Serfontein, S-E-R-F-O-N-T-E-I-N, and Hurter,
15 H-U-R-T-E-R .
16 Q. The work you were doing when you got
17 your bachelor's degree, at that point in time you
18 didn"t-know it would .have some bearing upon your
19 future work?
20 A. No . In fact, nobody knew until 19 -- well, I
21 had suggested in -'you've probably seen it -
22 something I wrote in the_late '60s -- late
23 'S0a/early '60s that the conditions in a burning
24 cigarette were such that things like dimethyl
25 nitrosamine could possibly be formed . And then

Vol . 4, Pg . 574
1 two ;men in Germany, Druckrey, D-R-U-C --
2 D-R-U-C-K-R-E-Y, and Schmahl, S-C-H-M-A-H-L,
proposed the same thing, I think, in 1961 or '62 .
4 And ; subsequently, they were found .
5 Q . What is a nitrosamine?
6 A . It's an amine with a nitrosa group hanging on
it .
Q Is there some alleged health problem
9 with nitrosamines?
10 A .~ Well, in 1956, Magee and Barnes, in England,
11 found that they were tumorigenic .
12 Q . Hae,there been any work published
13 . since 1956_that would suggest that -- was it
14 Magee?
15 .Magee, M-A --
16 Q And .Barnes were wrong?
17 No .
18 . Q Have you ever disputed Magee and
19 . Barnes' work?
20 . Vve never done the kind .of work they did .
21 Q When -- did you ever accept that
22, nitrosamines were .tumorigenic?
23 Were tumorigenic in animals .

G,
24 0 When did you first believe that
25+ nitrosamines were tumorigenic in animals?

Vol . 4, Pg . 575
1 Well, when you start reading the literature
after,1956 -- I forget the exact number, but
probably 350 nitrogamines have been synthesized,
used for one thing or another, and I think all but
about ten of them have shown some activity in
animals in some way or another . Mostly on
feeding .
8 Q . Mostly on what?
9 On feeding .
10 Of couree, .some of them are -- some of
11 them .are in cigarette smoke . Some of them are in
12 your ;bacon . Some of them are in your cooked
13 bacon .
14 Have there been similar studies, like
15 the polycyclic hydrocarbons, where you"need a
16 minimum level of'nitrosamines to become .
17 .tumorigenic?
18 A . I'm sure there'have been, but I can't think
19 mean
20 Q Nobody did like Wydner (sic) did,
21 where they kept-reducing the amount in half, until
22 they got to a level that --

Ln
N
23 A . You mean Wynder W-Y-N-D-E-R . ~
~
m
24 Q . Wydner . ~
w
Co
Wynder . W-Y-N-D-E-R . -j
25 A.

Vol . 4, Pg . 576
1 Q . W-Y?
2 N-D-E-R .
Q . D-E-R .,
Nobody did any studies like Wydner,
5 that -
A. Wynder .
7 Q Wynder . Nobody did any studies -
A . The'man's`been'in the business for 47 years,
and you don't know his name?
10 Q . 41 .
11 He was the`first published --
12 0 I thought you said me . I'm sorry .
13 Wynder published his first article in
14 1950 .
15 0 If you criticize my age, I want you to
16 get it'right .
17 Nobody"did any studies similar to him?
18 A . I don't know, sir .
19 Q . You didn't do any .
20 No .
21 Q . And,, I'm sorry, what year did you say?
22 It was, '50 -- '63/'64, to be determined to be in
23 tobacco smoke?
24 Yeah . I think it was "63/'64 .
25 Then there was a big controversy of
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 577
whether it was formed actually there or formed
2 arti•factually du.ring the collection of the smoke .
it seenmed,-every time something came
4 up, .:there was a-c-ontroversy . And eventually
5 procedures were worked out .that it could not be
artifactual . It had .to be -- whatever you found
was the true`bill of .goods .
Q . Have you been deposed before today?
9 Yes .
10 Q . How many_times?
11 A . ` Well, three weeks ago, was it? Would be
12 Minnesota, in the beginning of the Arch
13 deposition . That's the only time I've been
14 deposed for smoking and health-related .
15 Q . What other types of depositions have
16 you given?
17 A . There was a deposition on a procedure that
18 Reynolds .had developed on how to expand tobacco .
19 And'in some of our .work we -- in examining
20 competitive products, we-became very suspicious
21 that :American'was using our process . And there
22 was a case invOlving-that, and I was deposed
23 during .,'-that .
24 Q
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 578
Q . Did that actually go to trial?
No . American paid up .
3 Q. It was :a patent infringement case?
A. Yes .
5 Q . What process?
Expansion off tobacco .
Q . Does that have .a number on it or a
letter, G1'3?
G13 .
101 Q How long were you deposed?
11 think it was two days . Day and
12 a half, something like that .
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 court action?
20 I have no idea .
21 Q . Other than,that deposition, have you

Ln
~-A
22 ever givenàny other depositions? -4
N
m
23 A . - There 'was a càse of -- about the -- about the 4%
24 tobacco expansion business, with Philip Morris .
25 And",that was probably 15 years ago I've
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 579
1 forgotten the date . It was done over in
Charlotte .
Q . How long were you deposed in that
4 case7 ~ ~ ~
was guess .
10 N
11 Q . Have you<given any
12 related to,the research you've done at Reynolds?
13 A. I don't understand'"sworn etatement ."
14 Q . . Have you ever signed any documents
15 where somebody aeked, you to swear under oath the
16 truth .of what was'in the document, affidavit or
17 otherwise, notarized?
18 MR . BLANCATOs There is an affidavit
19 dealing with some'doCuments, privileged documents,
20 that has been provided in one of these smoking
21 health cases .
22 MS . KNISELY : Was that in Minnesota?
23 MR . MCDERMOTT I believe that's
24 correct .
25 BY MR .' MAISTROS :

Vol . 4, Pg . 580
Q . We'll get into your employment history
at Reynolds, but when was your last year of
full-time employment at Reynolds?
A . Well, in 1987 -- it's a little difficult to
explain . 1987, ,Reynolds offered an incentive
retirement plan . And since -- under the
conditions of the incentive retirement, it took me
past .65 . I accepted it .
So .my last day of work was August the
10 31st, 1987 . But my .fu]1-time employment or pay
11 continued through`March<the lst, 1989 . Because
12 I-- because of my tenure at Reynolds and the
13 conditions of the' :incentive plan, I had 18 months
`14 continued pay, I guess_they called it . So I don't
15 know how you want to fit that i
16 MR . BLANCATO : Are we at a good point
17 or about to take .' a break?
18 MR . MAISTROS : Sure . Any time .
19 MR . BLANCATO : Let's take a break .
20 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going off the Ln

~
J
21 record at 10 :44 a .m . m
~
22 (Recess taken from 10 :44 a .m . to 11 :00 w
~
N
23 a .m .)
24 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going back on the
25 record at 11 :00 a .m .

Vol . 4, Pg . 581
MR . MAISTROS : The affidavit you
provided, that's in'the'Minneeota litigation, is
that a stipulation? Is`that a -- are we --
MR . BLANCATO : I think --
MR . MAISTROS : I don't want to stop
now, but if~we can, .at the break, just check and
.7 a
or -- I'd just like to see it .
9 MR . BLANCATOs- Sure .
10 BY-MR: MAISTROS
11 Doctor,"have you given any -- whether
12 they were sworn or unsworn statements, any
13 statements to third parties, related to the
14 research you've done -- or you did at RJR, to
15 somebody other than your counsel? Has anyone ever
16 come up to you and eaid, "I'd like to ask you some
17 questions about what .you_did at RJR," just in an
18 informal setting?
19 Yes . I'm trying to think of his name .
20 reporter'in Greensboro, Catanosa, phoned me
21 some four or five years :back, and I refused to
22 talk to him .
23 4. Did he do an article-eventually or
24 Well, he did a whole bunch of articles on
25 some things other people had told him .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 582
Q . Was there a particular subject or
theme that he ;was writing about?
It was"about an .incident that happened in
4 1970 .
. :
Q . And 'this was,what newspaper?
6 A . The Greensboro some ;thing or other . I don't
know the name of it .
Q Did anyone at Reynolds tal,k to him in
series, in that'article?
10 I don't know if'they were -- whether they
11 were .at Reynolds at the`time . Some ex-employees
12 talked with him .
13 Q . Was the subject of that article about
14 the animal testing?
15 A . I guess you'd aay that .
16 0 The closing of the mice or the rat
17
18
19 Q Was :it .mice or rats?
20 A . Mostly mice . Did have some cats .
21 Q . Have you ever given any media or
newbpaper interviews'about your work at Reynolds? Ln

22 ~
_J
23 No . Iive given presentations at scientific
24 meetings .
25 Q . Has anyone from the Justice Department
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 583
attempted to interview you?
2 was trying to think .
4 That would include the FBI, the U .S .
Àttorney .'s .Office .
About my work?
6 Q . Yes .
A. No . I had an FBI guy come and talk to me one
8 time ., many`years agoi because a young lady that
was working for me had applied to go in the Peace
10 Corps, and they wanted some background on her .
11 Q . That's the only time :you've ever
12 been --
13 I think the -- to my recollection .
14 you know of any'current or former
15 employees at Reynolds that have been interviewed
16 Justice Department, including the FBI?
17 No, I don't . I don't know anybody .
18 Have you'been interviewed by anyone
19 from the FDA?
20 A. No .
21 Q Have you ever appeared before any
22 panels of the FDA to give testimony?
23
24 Have you,ever appeared before Congress
25) to}give testimony?
WAdA &-SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 584
A . No .
R• Have you ever appeared before any
legislative ;body to'give testimony?
5 0 Did .you ever prepare any papers that
were presented before any legislative body with
respect to the work you did at Reynolds?
A . No .
Q . Did you ever review any papers that
10 were provided'to any legislative body with respect
11 to research that was :being done at Reynolds?
12 Can we back up a second?
13 Q . Sure .
14 A . What do you call .legislative body?
15 Q Like before a House of Representatives
16 or a Senate panel or congressman or -
17 .(Witness shakes head .) No . No .
18 Q Did you prepare any papers that were
19 presented to any sort of governmental entity?
20 .' Back in the mid '60s I .prepared some stuff
21 for management that was-- much of which was
22 turned over to the FTC, :when they were getting
23 ready to implement .their procedure .-- develop and -j

~
' m
24 implement their,procedure on the FTC tar and ~
w
~
m
251 nicotine .

Vol . 4, Pg . 585
Is that the kind of thing you're --
Q. Yes ., something along those lines .
You prepared -- but those were papers
you did for Reynolds't hat, at the time .you
prepared them, you didn't know they were going to
be turned over to the government? Or did you?
No, I ;didn't -- I prepared them for the folks
that asked for them .
Q . And theee papers related to measuring
10 the tar and nicotine'in cigarettes, or the
1.1 labeling?
12 That, plus some of the problems that exist -
13 coexist with that procedure, many of which have
14 resurfaced again now,
15 Q . You mean the procedure for determining
16 levels?
17 Yeah . And what it``meant and so on .
18 Q. Did you .ever review the work of anyone
19 else at Reynolds-that was eubmitting paper or
20 statemente'or li'terature to the government with
21 respect to any iseue ;related .to smoking?
22 A . We -- back in -- around 1980, Reynolds was
23 involved in a-- a problem with one of our
24 competitor's cigarettee ; we did a large amount of
25 work on that . The,.Barclay ; I'm sure you're aware
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 586
r
of the 'Barclay incident . And we turned over a lot
information that we had generated on the
Barclay -- Barclay being measured on the FTC
proCedure, and the Barclay as it was'being smoked
by people . We-turned all that over to the FTC .
.Q What was'°-your role in that process?
Well, I was :director
And the people-that weree doing the work, worked
for .~m Dr . Jokin Reynolde,
10 David c3ilbert ; >so on . .
11 Q
12
13 Q Have, you ever
14 Pritchard?'
15 . . : a . ... .
16 Any other circumstances-you can recall
17 where you were-invo] .ved in either preparation or
18 review of documents that were submitted to
19 governmental agencies?
20 Well, I'm sure you were aware'of the National
21 Cancer .Institute study on less hazardous
22 cigarettes ; I wae-invo1ved in that . I don't know
23 whether this is pertinent or not . I audited many
. 24 of thoee meetings :and was the representative at
25
WAGF# ~ & SPINELLI` (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 587
were -- drafts of-the reports were put together, I
2 didà lot of proofreading and correcting, and so
onand so forth, for the '-
reports, which'was `sent'back to the NCI . I don't
5 know whether, tthey r- they included some of the
changes Irecommended,' and some they didn't .
7 Is that the kind of thing-you're
looking for?
Q . Indirectly, ]
10 governmental-related, but
The ``FDA, ii
12 testimony you've never presented any papers or
13 testimony to that'agency? Other than the one
14 you -= well that was FTC . So, FDA,' .you've never
15 presented any papers or teptimony?
16
17 Have you ;prepared anybody that
18 appeared'before any .governmental agency, such as
19 the FDA or the FTC? .
20 No . Not that I
21 Q .< In Ap .ri1. o ;f of Reynolds
22 and some other C :O .'s, testified before Congress . Ln
23 Did you play any role in the preparation of that
24 testimony?
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . Pg . 588
wasn't an employee, t)ien .
Q . Were you receiving any`money from
Reynolds in 1994?
A . I had two contracted -- consulting things
'One was to write the book on
nitrosamines, and the other was to take part in a
planning s'ession, but I-think both -- both of
those were prior to 1994 .
10 MR . MCDERMOTT : This was reviewed in
11 the~past deposition that you all participated in .
12 MR . :MAIS.TROS : I'm not ;getting into
13 that . Ijust wanted to make certain that none of
14 youx` work involved any preparation for testimony
15 that was-provided to .Congress in April of '94?
16 THE WITNESS : No . No, sir .
17 BY MR . MAISTROS
18 Have you assisted in the preparation
19 any witnesses thathave been deposed in any of
20 the`:tobacco litigation?
21 Just myself .
22 Q. And':how' many times --

m
23 I needed all the help°I could get .
24 many' times
251 Counsel to; prepare",for your deposition?
WAGA & ;SPINELLI ' (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 589
'©
. : . Let's l.t' a
we'last met, about three weeks ago . I guess I
5 probably met with them .Iour or five times, maybe
six . I don't
Q And i f :: you
8 time you spent with your counsel preparing for the
deposition, what would .the number of'hours .be?
10 Well, a lot of -it involved those boxes .
11 The documents?
12 Yes . Carrying them back and forth from my
13 house to Mr . Blancatols office,- and back to my
14 home, and here to get'them copied, and so on and
15 so forth .
16 Were you paid by anyone to do that?
.17 supposedly was paid,by the Arch people .
18 if you iaant to know
19
20 0 Were you paid by Reynolds or anyone
21 affiliated by Reynolde"to prepare for your

N
22 depo,sition today? ~
,m
23
24 Other,-than actually -physically
25 carrying the documenta ; how much time was spent
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 590
preparing for the depos.ition today?
A . Oh, I don't know . Maybe a dozen hours .
Q . Was there anyone other than
Mr . Brancato`-
,MR . MAIS TitOS
MR .
7 BY MR .`MAISTROS :
Q . -- Blancato presentàt those meetings?
Sometimes Mr . McDermott, sometimes
10
11 Counsel :for RJR attended the meetings
12 with your counsel?
13 mean, just these two : Jones Day and
14 Womble Carlyle .
15 4 They're .not your attorneys, though,
16 are they?
17
18 Q, What did you discuss in those
19
20 MR . MCDERMbTT : Object . Privileged .
21 MR . .-,ShANCATO : Objection .
22 MR . MAISTROS : How is it' privileged?
23 MR . MCDERMOTT :_ He's a former
24 employee . We re t'alking about matters that relate
251 to the defense of the caee ; we're entitled to talk
WAGA &'SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 591
to .him on a privileged basis .
2 BY MR. . MAISTROS :
Q Do you have
do you have a written document with Reynolds that
pertains to'the .teetimony that you've given in
Have you entered into any agreements
with Reynolds to not disclose information without
1. 0 advising Reynolds .or their counsel first?
11 No .
12 Q . And the only counsel you've retained
13 in this matter is your own personal counsel?
14 Yes .
15 Q . Reynolds' :'counsel is not your counsel?
16 As far as I kndw, they're not .
17 Q . Who is paying your counsel?
18 -Reynolds .
19 Q . Who selected your counsel?
20 I guess, - i'ndirectly, I, did .
21 Q . How, indirectly?
22 . Well, I needed a .lawyer, and the first one
23 that came to mind was tny. `son . But he works
24 200 -miles away -and' .w.as alreadyd tied up,' and so on
251 and so forth .

Vol . 4, Pg . 592
r
1 Q. And :how .did you get to your current
counsel?
3 A . . Well, I guess Mr . Holton .said : There's a
young man that w .ould ;do a'good job for you .
does work for Womble Carlyle, and so on .
Q M Holton, Reynolds' counsel?
Yeah .'
10 preparation for .your,deposition?
11 Well, for the Minnesota case,' they provided
12 us :with a stack of documents, a foot and a half
13 high . . went through those prior to the last time
14 we ;met, what, two or three weeks ago, three weeks
15 ago . But I reaily didn't -- since you folks
16 didn't provide me with :,any, .documents, I didn't go
17 through that many .
18 n the ' preparation for the Minnesota
19 deposition or the Minnesota case deposition, you
20 reviewed°only documents that were,provided .by the
21 person who was questioning you?

Ln
~
22 A~ . I don_'t .know who provided them . They showed ~
6
23 up one day here . . 4%
~
6
24 Q, Did ;you review any documents that were ~
251 provided by your own counsel?

Vol . 4, Pg . 593
An affidavit, I`reviewed, before I signed it .
2 Did you review any documents that were
provided by Reynolds' counsel?
4 You mean these two gentlemen?
©'
The reason .Ì'm ;heaitating, I've been involved
in this businees" so long and I've reviewed so
much, can't put it in perspective of when I did
what .
10 I guess I did,'but I couldn't tell you
11 There weren't .very many .
12 Did you review'any of the previous
13 that were taken in any -- any tobacco
14
15
16 Which'onee?
17
18 Q. Was :that-a`'deposition or was that
19 court .test-imony?
20
21
22
23 Q . And why did you review that?
24 Well,'I had hired David Townsend in 1977/78,
25' and I just wanted to see how he handled it . I had
WAGA'& SPINELLI (201)' 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 594
seen him, a little bit on television, and I wanted
How"did'you obtain-the transcript?
I got a copy, of it f rom Mr .
Q .' Did you ask M
the'transcript?
Yes .
I :.asked for it .
10 Q Other than Dr . Townsend's court
11 testimony, did you`review any other testimony?
12 'For this case?
13 Q
14
15 did .
16 Who else?
17 I looked at the depo,sition of -- or the trial
18
19 1961 . .
20 Who i Ochsner?
21 Dr .-Ochsner is one of the first two men to
22 remove lungs, either i - whole lung or part of a
23 lung,,back in'the early days . Dr . Evarts Graham
24 .And Dr . Ochsner :had a clinic m
25 New-Orleans . Very famous man .
WAaA~& ;SPINELLI` (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 595
r
Q What prompted you to review his
2 testimony?
>
3 Well, he was a :great proponent of the fact
that cigarette smoking,wae the cause of lung
-canc-er . And some of the testimony in that case
6 showed that there was a fluctuation between his
7 opinion on that and the'data he presented over six
8 °or eight years,-"in half a dozen publications, of
9 his clinical findings . But he kept saying he
10 would write an article at one point, in time,
11 saying : My opinion ia, This is the cause . And
12 his clinical data said ; We can't find any
13 correlation between place of residence, and
14 occupation ; and smoking or diet . And this went
15 So he was .ul
16
17 And course he is quoted in the '64,
18 the '79, the ".82 Surgeon General's report, and the
19 only one they .-- paper they quote is the first
20 time he ever said it in 1939, that cigarette
21 .smoking was probably the cause of lung cancer .
22 A11 the caaes-where<his clinical data didn't prove
23 that, they left out .
24
25 A . They left it out .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 59 6
1 Q What prompted .you, though, to read hi s
testimony before your deposition today ?
happened to be looking at something and saw the
I had a copy of his testimonyand I remembere d
What :were`yo u
8 What wae,I looking at
Q . That you saw a
10 hooking at som e
11 some diaries that you folks copied .
12 Is Ochsner strial testimony among th e
13 documents you provided to us ?
14
15
16
17 Nobody .
18
19 Where is . it now ?
20 It's at home .
21
Ln
22 documents at home to :produce, I assume somebody
i 6
23 asked you to look and see what you had at home ?
24 Yeah .
25
(201) 992-411 1
Vol . 4, Pg . 597
1
1 home?
They're here .
Q . So Ochsner
theee boxes?
5 No, it isn't . No .
Q .' Why did you
I didn't .
MR . BLANCATOs-
-tYiat were responsive` to the : subpoena .
10 BY`'MR : MAISTROS3
11 A11'the .~documerits at your home, were
12 they provided to an attorney who went-through them
13 and decided what would be produced .to us?
14
15 Including the Ochsner testimony?
16 o, I didn't .
1? What, ot:her-than the Ochsner
18 testimony, did you not give'`to'Mr . Blancato?
19 got - for example, I've got files
20 on and I think we' ;ve been through' this . I have
21
22
23
24
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 598
Q . You didn't .pro.duce your index card in
there?
offered to, and'said they didn't want it .
THE WITNESS- ; Right?
MR . MAISTROS : I'll take it . You
still have it?
F MR .'BLANCATO : No, no, no, no .
MR . MAISTROS : We'll discuss it at a
10 BY MR .•`MAISTROS
11 Q . You have-an index file of what?
12 What's on the indexes?
13 Well, there's more work -- references
14 perti-nent to the work I did, from 1947 probably up
15 to 1970-something, :'75, maybe 1980 .
16 MS . RNISELY : If I could clarify the
17 record for just a .second : I believe,
18 Mr . Blancato, we,made t'he agreement and
19 -underetanding, w3,th r{egard :to the index, we would
20 not, at the present time, require Dr . Rodgman to
21 produce that .' We wouZd, however, reserve
22 depending on'the deposition testimony with regard
23 o :the index, reserve the right to request the
24 production thereof . .
251 MR . BLANCATOr And my position would

Vol . 4, g 599
1 be!that we objected to : :production of that on the
grounds set forth .in the written objection . I
provided Me .-Knisely>with an example of one or two
or three of these cards,'if you still have a copy
of t.hem .
7 MS . KNISBLYs Right . And we decided
to disagree until ---,until Arch made a
determination, after the deposition, whether they
10 would -- or as the deposition progressed, whether
11 they would require the production of that or not .
12 And4I believe that wae the same with his
13 bibliography .
14 MR . BLANCATO : Correct .
15 MS . :KNISELY : I'm sorry .
16 BY MR .-MAISTROSs
17 4 What else did you not produce to
18 counsel?
19 That's it, as far as I know, sir . I mean, I
20 .didn't give you'copies-,of every issue of Tobacco
21 Science or every=issue of Beitragezur
22
23 T-A'-B-A-K= .S .-F-O,-R-S -C=H-S-U-N- ;G
24
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 600
I don't know about the public library, but
any good science library will have them .
Q . I tried to get in Bowman .aray ; they
wouldn't let .me in . You mean the public library
or Bowman Gray?
know,- ; x .+.ve got
figured you didn't want those . . Books that I refer
10 MR . BLANCATO : For the record, those
11 books are in public domain,
12 THE ;WYTN$SS : Yeah . Oh, yeah .
13 BY MR . MAISTROS s
14 Q . Did_`you have any documents, other than
15 those that were at your home, that related to the
16 work you did while at; Reynolde?
17 A . Would'you say that again, sir . .
18 Q . Other than the documents you had at
19 your home, is there any other location where you
20 had documents related to the work you did at
21
22 A. No . I mean, Reynolds has copies o N

i 0
~
23 everything I ever wrote,' think . r
N
24 Q Between '54 and '87 or '89, did you
25 keep documents on computers?
WAaA' & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, g . 601
1 N
2 Q .
3 era? You didn't keep any
or~
5 There waa'computer .otuff at -- computer
6 system at work,,but I didn't --
things on the computer . I`don',t :know where that
stuff is now .
Q . You didn't take any computer discs or
101 keep any computer diece ;after your employment at
11
12
13 Did you "review any of the" documents
14 that you gathered .from your home specifically for
15 preparation of this deposition today?
16
17 Q Did you re other than the
18 Ochèner testimony and Townsand ;testimony, any
19 other testimony?
20 A. No .
21 Q Did`you talk to anyone'that had been

Ln
22 deposed in any of the .' .-- what I'll call "current ~
23 . tobacco litigati, .on, ." to see what was said in their

~
24 depo.sitions? w
25
WAGA & SPINELLI

Vol . 4, Pg . 602
Q Dc you know anyone, other than
yourself, who's been deposed from Reynolds?
. .Murx'ay Senkus, John Reynolds .
know several people that are going to be deposed :
Charles Green, Michael Ogden . I think
6 Dr .'DeBeth .izy has been, but I-- I haven't talked
to him about it .
8 Q. You just-know they were deposed? You
didn't discuss any questions they were asked?
10 No .
11 Q . They didn't tell you what they were
12 asked or how fun it'was or how miserable it was?
13 A. No .
14 Q. How about Dr . Hayes? Do you know
15 Wallace Hayes?
16 haven't`seen Wallace Hayes since
17 1987 .
18 Q Did you .`do any-thing else specif ically
19 in preparation-for your deposition today?
20
21 Q .' Did you meet with any attorneys, other ;

Ln
22 than your personal counsel and Reynolds attorneys? ~
~
m
23 No . ~
~
24 Q . Have you provided any sort of outlines I &
25 or papers to assist your attorneys in this
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 603
Q Are,`you being paid'in any fashion to
assist Reynolds i this specific litigation?
I'm not being paid for anything to do with
6 this deposition .`'
0 How about in --~are you being paid in
any,fashion for tobacco litigation?
. I have been, in the past, but not for this
10
11
12 any compensation from Reynolds?
13 most of my
14
15 mentioned of specific contracts, which Reynolds
16
17
18
19
20 .
21 specifics that were .previously :,gotten into at the
22 other deposition the~ ;~other day, but I'm just
23 looking'gene'rally for time framea . From '87 or
24 '89 to the present, ;have you, on and off, been a
25 paid consultant to Reynolds?
WAaA & SPINELLI 201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 604
1 Twice .
of the incentive'retixement was that -- one of the
5 conditions was that you could`not serve as a
consultant for Rey)iold,s through five"yeare after
.-' after the en'd,of ;your ; employment .
0 Okay . -you-are a
9 Womble'Carlyle,'t .hough? .
10 . Right .
11 And`'d
12- for•any tobacco companies, other than Reynolds?
13
14
15 confuse these two projects . You're .;not suggesting
16 that the only consulting you've done since '89 for
17 Reynolds is on those two projects . .`When .I say
18 °coneulting for Reynol :de," .Ì don't care who pays
19 you . If the end benefit is going to be to
20 Reynolds, I just want to know if you're still --
21 I!ve`done things for Womble Carlyle that I
22 presume that t he money comes through Reynolds, to
23 Womble Carlyle, to me . But those were the two
24 specific things where -- in which I had a contract
251 with R .J . Reynolds, which was -- been spelled out
WAGA .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 605
1 before .
Q The work that you do for Womble
Carlyle is 100 percent Reynolds?
4 Yes . Yes .
5 And have ; you provided documents to
7 A .
©'
those documents?"
10
11 Q
12 you're going to be an expert or fact witness in
13 the .Arch litigation?
14 was told I would be a fact witness .
15 Have you .been told you're going to be
16 an .expert or fact witness :in any other litigation?
17 understand I'may ..be -- supposed to be an
18 expert witness with Texas .
19 o you know what areas of expertise
20 you're going to .testify .on?
21 A . Tobacco smoke composition and control .
22 0 Would that include the concept of
23 addiction or habituation?
24 We11, I didn't do much anything on those
25 areas, sir .
WAGA & SPINELLI• (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 606
r
0 What's the time period - I'm looking
generally for .inonths, if :you can give me months ;
have you been a
conau.1:tant to ;Womble :Carlyle?
Are we talking about .specifiC ;cases or total?
Q. No .
That would go •back to 1984 .
Okay . So you were a
Wombl,e Carlyle while you were still a full-time
10
11 Yeah . was helping them with'a couple of
12 projects at that time .
13 Were you also paid by Womble Carlyle
14 from 184 to 87 or '89?
15 No . . Up till
16 after ; that .
17 .Q .
18 9 you were still-on .;the payroll at Reynolds --
19
20 Q
21 You were also receiving compensation

cn
22 fro.m .Womble Carlyle?' ~
; 1-4
23 A .` Setween September-the lst, and March the ~ ~

~
~
~
24 1et,, . .,' 89, yes .
25 Could you ;tell` me how much you were
(201) 992-4111
Vol . , Pg . 607
be,ing paid by Womble Carlyle .
2 $12 0 an hour .
Yes .
,$140 an hour .
4 8
10 The ;two incidents that I had two projects
11 through -- with>R .J`. Reynolds R& D .
12 Other than : :those two . is it all
13 Womble Carlyle .or Reynolds?
14 A .
15
16 Arch?
17
18
19
m
20 s Ochsner,still .alive?- ~~
~
%D
21 think so,
22 What prompted .you'to,be at that trial,
in New Orleans?
24 Soon after i came to ReYnolds,> in 1954, I had
25 wri .t'ten a --, a report, which really,wae an update,
WAaA & .SPINELLI

Vol . 4, Pg . 608
I
1 I guess .. I'm'sure you've seen it, a report
written by Dr . Claude E . Teague in February 1953 .
And : -
than mine .'
Because of the ;things that had happened
between February '53_and when I came in June, and
8 work at the-Banting & Best
Department of -Medical-Research, theyàsked me to
10 update Claude's'thing -- report .
11 And, 'o
12 there was still the ongoing controversy of, you
13 know, the polycyclic°'hydrocarbong in smoke and so
14 on, in some of the work that had been published .
15 And'then, of course, in'late '53, Dr . Wynder and
16 his ;colleagues published the-èkin tnouse -- mouse
17 skin painting :study .
18 I updated it .- And somehow or other
19 it got .from the research department into -- it was
20 shown to' .management, including Mr . #ienry H . Ramm,
21 the head lawyer, vice president of legal counsel .
22 And he-asked if I would help do something for the
23 law department and outside counsel, to collect and
24 critique publications dealing with the smoking and
25 health situation .
WAGA'.' . & S P I NE L L I .' (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 609
2 make a- comment here . D
number of years ., a scientific assistant, a
paralegal, assisting :I.,awyers, both in-house and
outeide ; in preparing for and defending
6 litigation .
general-terms the nature of his activities, we
regard all of that as .privileged .and off limits .
10 And ;_other than giving,you a bit of background,
11 should you choose to make any sort of a challenge,
12 we're going to claim .privilege .
13 Rodgman, I would caution you
14 to be very general in your description of your
15 activities . And
16
17 yeare for that?
18 .{ MR . MCD$RMQTT
19
20 number of ;y:ears ."
21 MR . MCDBRMOTT .
Ln
22 approximately, to 1966''or I-A
%4
23 inte'rmittent-dutiee`thereafter . But on a regular
24 basis, for approximately a 12-year period .
251BY MR . MAISTROS :
WAGA & SPINELi,I . (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 610
1 Q . Is .that_'correct,
. Yes .
What :was ;the question about 1960?
5 ;The original question was why you were
in New Orleans in`1960 with Dr . Ochener .
7 Well I had
161,' whenever that tri,al was, I had been
collecting the literature and had hard copies of
161 all the .pertinent pa,pers,-and so on and so forth .
11 And with,the trial in"New Orleans, the lawyer
12 said -- both in-houeeànd external said : We want
13 al1 that stuff .in New Orleans . .- You .come with it,
14 and it we need something, you find'it for us .
15 So I was there for that purpose, sort
16 gopher, I guepe, with regard to scientific
17 literature . And course I
18 the courtroom .and watched all the goings-on, and
19
20 I,d d run and get ; a.
21 VIDEOQRAPHER : : M
22
23
24
25
WAaA & SPINELLT_ (201) 992-4111

A . June the 23rd, ;1954 .
2 Q And when did you start providing sort
f legal assistance to :Reynolds?
The end of october 1955 .
5 Who hired ;you? Who ;interviewed you?
Well,,the person I was .;in most contact with
7 was' Dr . Murray Senltus, The interview involved
it-wag a very nice .'interview system : You met
every manager and,-of course, director, . .which was
10 Dr . Kenneth H .°Hoover . And you .met Dr . Colby in
11 the library ; Dr . Markunas, head of analytical
12 chemistry ; Mr . Sprinkle was agricultural research ;
13 and "so on and . eo forth . >
14
15 title at'that point?
16 He was manager . .of'the chemical research
17 division .
18 Q Did 'they, have a health or -- health
19 type~department at 'that point in time?
20
21 Smoking .,and health?
22
23 Are you aware of D
24
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 612
Yes . Dr . Simmons didn't come till 1965 or
2 I think it was .in there .
3 Q .` And his department was referred to as
what?
5 Smoking ;and health?
I think it ;was called biochemistry and
biological I've f orgotten the exact name of it .
8 0 Okay .
MR . MAISTROS : Let's take a short
10 break while they'exchange the videotape, okay?
11 VIDEOaRAPHER : We're going off the
12 record at 11 :41 :a .m .
13 (Recess taken from 11 :41 a .m . to 11 :47
14 a .m .)
15 VIDEOGRAPHER : This is tape 2 of the
16 videotape deposition of Alan Rodgman, Ph .D . We're
17 going back on the'recor .d at .11 :47 a .m .
18 BY MR . MAISTROS :
19 Q. Doctor, how did you hear about the
20 opening at .Reynolds? :;
21 It was an advertisement in the -- one of the
22 issues -- it's a weekly publication of the
23 American Chemical .Society called Chemical and
24 ,ar}g4ineerinq Newe . And they had an ad in there
25 looki.ng for chemists skilled in isolation work,
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 613
Q •; Had you
companies?
advertised?
Research chemist .
10 Here . April -t,
©' When you say you met every -- was it
12 manager in the company?
13 . In the research department .
14 Q . Was that all on April the lst or --
15 A . April the lst and 2nd .
16 Q What was the research department in
17 April,of 1990 -- 1954?
18 What do you mean, "What was it"?
19 Q . What did it :consist of?
20 Well, it was .in'a new'building that had been
211 opened in 1953 . believe the whole procedure of

~
22 the-opening was on .national television with John , N
~
~
23 Cameron, Swayze . It had a chemical research m
~
~
24 division under Dr . Se'nkus ; biochemical division N
(J1
251 under M.r . Jerry Snyder ; the analytical research
WAGA" & SPINELLI . (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 614
1 division under Peter Markunas ; the agriculture
.regearch under Dr . Charles Sprinkle ; the flavoring
3 and product department work under Dr . Samuel
Jones ; the .science information division was
managed by Dr . Frank'G .,eColby . I don't know
6 whether`there_was .anybody else I met .
Q. And they did not have a specific
8 division devoted to health at t'hat point in time?
10
11 particular division?
12 Chemical research division .
13
14
15 Oh, three or four months ago, on the phone .
16 a -in New 'York .
17 How was hishealth? : Do you know?
18 s not well . Hi e wife died a .little while
19 well, he wasn't too well anyway, and
20
21 old
22 What 'did you
23 A . Periodically, he'll call and-aak how things
24 are going, and we-chat : We've known each other,
25 as I say, since 1954 .
WAGA &'SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 615
,
you joined?
of ; ;years .
somewhere around there .
Do you know when he left?
was thinking'_-- probably -- someplace
thingg situation-in New York City .
Who was he consulting to? Do you
10 know?
11 guess, the: tobacco industry .
12 Q What did the science information
131 division do in 1954?
14 got - kept tabs of all the
15 publications on to baccoànd smoke and smoke
16 components, and anything to_do with smoking and
17, health and,so on, and .cataioged them and, in many
18 instances, had hard copies .. And of course they
19 subscribed to a great number of journals, and
20 those .were scanned for pertinent articles . And
21 there .was a pub -- not a publication, I guess, an
22 inter - in-house document that signaled to the
23 research employees :,that here's some articles that
24 have just come out,, whether they be biochemistry,

N
J
25 or whatever chemistry, analytical chemistry . And

Vol . 4, Pg . 616
that was ci.r"culat,ed, I think, twice a month,
something like that .
And then, of course, periodically they
would take the journals :that came in, you know,
once a month or twice a month, get them bound .
And there they are,` they're all up in the library .
Q . How`many,;people were in the science
information division in ' 54?_'
10 Q . Did that-divieion continue to exist
11
12 It sti11 exists .
13 Q. And what :,would you describe as the
14 overall purpose of that .division?
15 . It's to provide .the -- collect and-provide
16 the staff with information pertinent to the
17 research pro j ectss_' going on .
18 Outside of RJR? Or inside? Or both?
19 Everything : .
20 When you say "provide the staff,"
21 woul they provide research scientiets, such as

~
~
22 yourself, and management, both, or one or the ~
m
23 o the r ? ~
~
I N
~ OD
24 A . Well, I think, .in"the case of management, ~
25 they'd probably provide-summaries or -- more

Vol . 4, Pg . 617
1 .general articles rather than ., you know, detailed
analysis . You know, :the -- for example, Reynolds
3 people published articles on the composition of
smoke and .decide the isolation identification of
5 700'compounds, 400,of whichàre new and have names
that inost people,cou .l_dn 't even read, let alone
pronounce . Well,,is .management interested in
8 that? So we sent them the abstract and said 700
compounds identified, 450 for the first time, or
10 . whatever number it was,
11 Q . This newsiet,ter or`memo you referred
12 o that went out twice a month, . .was that a -- like
13 an internal newsletter? Did i,t'have a title?
14 Well, it .wae a document that -- probably half
15 an .inch thick, and it would have the't'itle,
16 jouxnal -- couple of .lines .about what .was in thee
17 article . You know, 4eolation of -so-and-so from
18 tobacco, or isolation of so-and-so,from tobacco
19 smoke, or new and analytical procedure for
20 whatever in smoker tobacco, things like that .
21 Q. Would .it -- would it have listings of
22 publications on anything that had to do with
23 bad?
24 I used-to kid D.r .`' Colby about it, because, if
251 it had anything do ;with tobacco, or cigarettes,

Vol . 4, Pg . 618
or cigars, or something, it was in there . And I
called him one day and'said : Frank, what are you
doing?
And they :had
5 zealous, they had picked up_ an entry from a
journal~that said,`so=-and-so company - .I forget
was now - has Pur,chased a new ;cigar shaped
for viewing-sports events, and that was
10 aoodyear .?
11
12 Frank,',that's stretching it, cigar-shaped balloon
13
14 4 The articles he would gather and
15 summarize or circulate t o the rest of the staff at'
16 Reynolds, it would be --'<there would be health
17 issues involved, as well?
18 Oh, yeah .
19
20 differentiate,between favorable and,unfavorable
21 articles to tobacco?
22 All you would have .to do, sir',
23 D
24 Q That's what' I'm asking . If the
25 articles is good, bad, or indifferent,

Vol . 4, Pg . 619
whatever is there, they're in this publication?
They're in this publication .
So if there was a tobacco-related
articl$ that appeared in any journal between 1954
and .the present ;' there's a 99 to 100 percent
chance it appeared 4n a circular that was
d3stributed to the RJR staff?
8 Yeah, I would say so .
9 When youèaid management -- I used
10 thatword . I don't -khow what I meant by it . What
11 did .:you mean by it? .-Who's management?
12 A . - Well, I'm talking about people out - - you
13 .know, the business manager, outside the R & D
14 management . Every department has a management
15 I guess, has a management situation .
16 4 Were th,e business managers copied on
17 thie circular that updated the periodicals?
18 No . I , don
19 Colby 'was
20
Ln
21
22 manager, as opposed
23 A . He had, a Ph .D . in :organic chemistry from
24 Univereity in Switzerland .
251 Q . When you were hired in June of --
WAaA :& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 620
©'
chemical research department, approximately?
A .
5 20 .
7 departments, biochemical? Did it vary or .
Yeah . For example,, the agriculture research
division, I think, ended up with six people . They
10 didn't do any extra agriculture research, but what
11 they did was, . to attend to the funding of
12 agriculture research projects by various -- North
13 Carolina'State University'or University of
14 • Kentucky, or whatever, t .hat,g wae ',being done on
15 tobacco growing and agronomy and all that stuff .
16 And,`they monitored the :progress of the projects
17 that'Reynolds was funding in the agronomy area and
18 .-so on .
19 Now, .th.e staff in the science
20 in'formation were :a-couple of staff people ; but
21 most ., ;o£ the work was done by clerical people . Of
22 course, there .were a lot of typing, and so on and
23 so forth, that was required for keeping track .
24 -those days they had,everything on-cards .
25) Q. Like your index card, index system?
WAGA & 'SPINELLI

Vol . 4, Pg . 621
Q. The five groups you mentioned that
were in existence in '54, would,there,,be one that
would look at .health'issues, even though it wasn't
designated as a, health divisiori or health
department?
Well, as I-- .a~s : .I said, when starting out at
Reynolds, the ;big controversy in terms of the
health issue, if ~you will, was, okay : Were the
10 polycyclice~there? If•._t'hey were, involved in
11 anything, should we know it .? And if they're
12 there, should''we lower them :and get rid of them?
13 o most of that work was done in the
14 chemical division .
15 Q . What,did the', biochemical ` division d
16 that was different than what the chemical research
17
18 . A'lot of their work involved what happened to
19 tobacco I don't know whether you know the
20 procedure of with tobacco, is,`when you buy
211 tobacco at auction,"you'get it so ;many pounds on

! cn
f..
22 pallet . And it's'brought in ~
23 and .then it's stemmed and it's stored for anywhere ~

w
24 between 12 months and 24 months . And as it ages, W
25 cert :ain things happen to it that improve the

Vol . 4, g . 622
flavor of the smoke .
They did,a lot of work -- what was
3 going on : When ;tobacco aged, and did you have to
age it as long as that, and so on . A l,ot of the
work involved the composition of tobacco as it
aged, and the'effect'on the flavor and consumer
7 acceptability_, and how,=it blended in with other
things in the tobacco .
Q That biochemical division, did that
10 etay•in'existence, in one f orm or another, u
11 until you left?
12 Well, in the mid '60s, roughly, it was
13 called
14 Dr .-Aldon Nielson came, it was expanded to
15 include, not oniy biochemistry, but some
16 biological work .
17 Q. Did you ;;ever cross over .from chemical
18 research to one of .these other divisions?
19 Yes', in
20 seventy let'p see .`
21 was promoted to~manager of the analytical
22
23
24
251
WAGA" & SPINELLI'' (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 623
research chemist, or the section head in charge of
the emoke work .
Q . I want to just focus on the period of
time-you were exclusively in the chemistry
5 department, !54 to '75 . When you were hired, were
6 you'tolds We''re,going to have you be w'orking on
7 this project o"r that project'=
or was it
10
11 Nothing specific .
12 4 Chemical research .
13
14 Were they ;aware of your seven-odd
15 yeare working wit h`polycyclic hydrocarbons?
16 it~was .in my resume .
17 Did they tell`you : You're going to
18 have the opportunity t
19 . No .
20
21 when : you started in '54, that had the type of
22 background you had in polycyclic hydrocarbons?
23
24
25I f rame ; you were the most knowledgeable person at

Vol . 4, Pg . 62 4
Reynolds in terms of polyoyclic hydrocarbons ?
3 Didthat ever change, during the whol e
period of time you~were at Reynolds ?
I doubt if it did . . Because what eventuall y
happened -- or what happened wasthat, after I
finished,my firs.t project and was'asked what I
8 wanted to work on and saidemoke, over the nex t
few,years_we did ourthing on the polycycli c
10
11 history of what_happened and what we -I guess I
12 shouldn't say "jokingly" defined as "what's th e
13 compound of .the month things ` went fro m
14 polycyclichydrocarbona ., and the next group o f
15 compounds that were considered to be a -- a
16 problem or might be a''problem, were a group o f
17 compounds called aza-arenes . Then it came to a
18 group of,compounda that -- called the phenols, an d
19
20 ciliaetats, and then came the'-nitrosamines, and
2 1 polonium, and so on and so forth . So, by th e
22 early '60s , most of the work on polycyclics wa s
23 finished .
24
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . , Pg . 625
Can we get
the'record to show
3 MR . LEEs
M Steve Sheller came in, from Arch litigation,
fr-om"Philadelphia .!
0 Did you have' to -gign an employment
8 agreement in .1954 when wyou joined Reynolds?
10 What was .=the'nature of that agreement?
11 It`'s been produced . It -- it was sort of a
12 : standard thing . Primarily, I think, protecting
13' t .he company -- if'•you were to leave and had been
14 involved in certain ._manufacturing functions, that
15 you°weren't to tell .anybody about it till so many
16 I've forgotten
17j
18 it like a .Confidentiality
19 agreement,
20 .Yeah . But it :-- it was, primarily, I guess
21 for proprietary things to do with`manufacturing,
22 more than anything . I`don't think it ever
23 m6ntioned research and,development in it . But
24 it's been so long ago since I read it .
25 ' You never, then, had to execute any
WAGA & SPINELL`l . (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 626
confidenti.ality.agreement :with respect to
was thinking :I-signed a document sometime
' . .80s
about the Premier--cigarette . Which I wasn't
involved with,that•much anyway .
Q . Whatever you knew, you weren't allowed

,
to disclose without getting somebody's permission
first?
10 Thatl s
11 Whether-i't's Exxori°or Pittsburgh
12 St6el or whoever .
13 Did you'ever actually sign a contract
14 for a specific length or- term of employment
15 Reynolds?
16 No .
17 Q . And the consulting -- two consulting
18 jobe-.you mentioned sPecifically for Reynolds were
19 not written documents?
201 Yeah, they were written -- they're written
21 contracts . They've already been provided .
22 MR .=MAISTROS : Have those been
23 provided?
24 THE WITNESS : Someplace
25 MR . MCDERMOTT : They were'produced in
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 627
1 the`- :last deposition .
2 BY MR . .MAISTROS
Q• Were the agreements_with Womble
Carlyle produced?- Are .there written agreements
with Womble Oarlyle? .~,
we :didn't have them anymore . When .they ran out,
; .they,never renewed them and neither did I .
Q . Do you have some sort of letter
10 agreement, just confirming what your hourly rate
11 is 'or
12 No . Well --` yea
13 the f irst ' ;coupl,e,-oi' years . You' know, I do
14
15a
16
17 ;_anything .
18 Q. . From 154 '' to '75
19 w Orleans case in the '60s tli$t you assisted on .
20 How many such cases -did you assist on when you
21 were' .in the chemistry department in that 21-year
22 period?
23 There was one in-New Orleans - - one in

I 0.
24 New Orleans, which .I, was there several times . w
25 There was 'one in St . Louis . I don't even remember
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 628
1 who .t:hat wae,, 'Then I was asked to provide some
2 information on occasion with -- was it Green case,
which wasn' t"agains't • Reynolds, and a Pritchard
case against somebody else . It wasn't Reynolds .
And that, as far ae '1 . :know, was it .
have no I
.,g . A tobacco manufacturer?
Oh, yeah . It was I don' t-`know whether it
3. 0 waa''American or . :who` it waa .
11 W ho :asked you to assist American in
12 that case?
13 Reynolda' lawyers . They wanted a summary of
14 something or other ; I've even forgotten_ what it
15 was .
16 Q . Did you attend any portion of the
17 trial?
18
19
20
2i
22 Did you
23
25 No : Provided the stuff to_Reynolde' lawyers,
WA,GA :& SPINELLI ,

Vol . 4, Pg . 629
and then I guesg it wen:t on its way .
n the .Pritchard case, you weren't
helping Reynolds? What company were you helping?
I've forgotten . .
Another
were'.1ike the Lartigue .-caae, which was the case in
8 New Orleane .
9 a . I
10 Lartigue, L-~A-12-T-I-G-U .-E, That was the case
11 in .:New -0rleans :
12 Q . How .' .were they similar?

.
~
13 -They're :all smoking and lung cancer cases,
14 bel,ieve .
15
16 asking you .to assist=other tobacco manufacturers
17 in their lung cancer'litigat'ion?
18 A . '-No, not really . I guess z,figured they

,
19 wanted this information . I think it was pretty
20 well to do with'smoke composition and so on . I
21 had published a lot,on smoke . .
22 Did you assist in the defense of any
23 other cases'fox any other tobacco manufacturers?
24
25 Do you know whether you received any
WAGA & SP.INELLI

Vol . 4, Pg . 630
,extra :income for assisting those other tobacco
Just my rbgu ;lar .pay ;f rom' Reynolde .
Q . Where was' the Pritchard case? Is that
Louis?
No . St . Louis was against Reynolds . I don' t
know-what it --'the name "Lowell" rings -- comes
o mind, but I'm not sure about the name of
the
10 4
11
12 . They were in the '60s, early '60s, I think .
13 : MR . MAISTROS : What do you gentlemen
14 want to do about lunch?
15 THE WITNESS : It's a good time to
16 quit•
17 MR . MCDERMOTT : I guesa .the witness
18 Why don't we accommodate
19 him . .
20 MR : MAISTROS : It.' .s his party .
21 VIDEOORAPH$.R : We're going off the
22 re off the record .
23 .
24 .m , . to . 1 :26 : p .m . )
25 VID'SOGRAPHER :' We' re going back on the
WAa,A & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

r
record .at 1 :26 p .
Q Dr . Rodgman, what was the first
project you worked .on at Reynolds?
5 The first project I worked on was the
synthesis of a series of compounds that might have
7 potential use .as flavorants,. These were a series
of'phenols . And what they were .looking for was
10 And -went about synthesizing, I don't
11 know, maybe 20,- .-22•of them . However, I knew, from
12 my previous work at .the literature surveying at
13 the .Banting, that some"phenols, at high
14 temperature, convert`to quinones, another class of
15 compounds . And the Japanese had done some work on
16 quinones, mouse painting experiments and so on,
17 ~and found them to be tumorigenic .
18 So-putting that together with a new
19 article : that came out while 'I wae inthe midst of
20 this, that a'man called Boutwell and his
21 colleagues,, ``thatls B~ .-0-U-T-W-E-L-'L,-reported that

Ln
~
22 some phenols were classified as`promoters because ~
~
m
23 they . enhance the activity of polycyclic ~~
~
w
24 hydrocarbons that show ' some tumorigenicity .
25
Vol . 4, Pg . 632
f
said ; Hey, you know ;` I,'ve nearly finished these
the grumbling~about polycyclics . Do you want to
put something that might .contribute quinones to
the "'smoke and have'another problem?
And the.y, ilooked at what I had there
They never used the
8 23 .or 22 compounda I,synthesized .,
Q. How long did that proj ect last?
10, A . About four months ., from June till November,
something like that ..;
12 Q.
13 being tumorigenic promoters, are there different
14 kinds of phenols?
15 V3.tamin E °
16 one of the great anti-carcinogens known .
17 . Everybody's t'aking .it nowadays, aren't they, to
18 divert cancer :=
19 Q . Vitamin E?'
20 MR . SHELLER : I knew it .
21 THE WITNESS3
22 are phenols that are -- that are in all our food ~

a
~
23 stuffs .- Cloves and cinnamon are loaded with m
24 various phen,ols .
25 BY MR . MAISTROSi

Vol . 4, Pg . 633
1 Q . Was there-a lot of literature, a
2 minimal literature?' . Describe the course or the
amount of literature there- ;was on phenols in '54 .
No, it ~- the literature on phenols escalated
when they couldn't expl .a.in~the mouse-contained
data', the number of tumors they were getting with
polycyclic hydrocarbons, either benzpyrene itself
or the'total polycyclic hydrocarbon fraction of
cigarette smoke ;-thie was Dr .- .Wynder, Hoffmann .
10 Dr . ."Wright, .who wasàctually my major professor at
11 the :'University of Tdronto'did the chemistry for
12 Dr . Wynder for four or five years, until
13 Dr . Hoffmann came on the scene .
14 They --'when they couldn't explain the
15 pol'ycyclic hydrocarbon results, they said :
16 There's not enough there ; that only accounts for
17 two, three percent . Said : Oh, we've got
18 promoters .
19 they lit on'the phenols, because of
20 this article by Boutwell . And then from about
21 1960, perhaps, to .1962/'b3, everything was phenol
22 promotion, plus polycyclic hydrocarbons . Except ~
23 there was only one problem with it . That Wynder ~

~
~
24 himself and Hoffmann ehowed, .what we had already I&
; L
251 shown : That, if you take the phenol-out of smoke,
WAGA ..& SPINELLI`

Vol . 4, Pg . 634
I
1 it°doesn't affect-the biological activity of the
smoke . So how can°you have a promoter that
doesn't promote? E
dropped after that .
Q .: Forever?
No, it's still around . But -- you know,
there are people who°never drop anything .
8 Q
It .was then . It i
101 man :'called,Aivin Kosak published an article
11 describing all the components in cigarette smoke
12 that ;had been,reported in ,the literaturee
13 throughout the world . There are about 90 ; of
14 which about .30 were<wrong,`by :the way . And phenol
15
16 it's been known for a long time . I
17 think it was identified in smoke someplace in
18 probably the 1930
19 Q . Have phe,nols been blamed as anything
20 else other than•a promo"ter?
21 We11, yeah, I guess some -- there has been Ln

H
22 gome work done`that phenol some-of the low

m
23 molecular weight .phenols are cocarcinogens, rather,,,
24 than promoters .
25 Do you know if Reynolds has done any
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 635
such work?
A. On the biological work?
5 Q
or verify or dispute whether`phenols were
promoters?` :
0 , we'didn't do any work . We did do work on
the fact that they were present ; we determined
10 their levels,'which agreed :with some of the work
11 in the .litexatur$ . And we also demonstrated that
12 the filter tip that we-used, which has a substance
13 called a plaeticizer!1n .it, took out about
141 85 percent of the phenols from the smoke . That
15' was'subsequently confirmed by four or five groups,
16 both `pro- and -anti-tobacco`.
17 Q Has°'there been any more recent or
18 modern .work relate.d'to .phenols and their potential
19 as,'promoters? . .
20 No . Once the -
21 Hoffmann ;showedathat if you took out the phenol
22` from smoke that°it didn't change the biological J ~

m
2 .3 ;activity of the smoke . I'd say : Hey, you had a
~
24 promoter that-wasn't promoting . And they sort o J
25

Vol . 4, Pg . 636
1 Now, at one time they considered
2 phenol as an indicator of that class of compounds
and :its .promoting effect, but they subsequently
dropped that argument .when it was proven to be
wro~'lg .
Q . What's an'indicator?
7 Yeah . It'was like a,marker, that phenol
itself gave a clue tp the series,of-low molecular
9 weight phenola, which .usual].y,is considered about
10 five or six or eight--compounds~that are present .
11 The same thing it .eai,d about benzpyrene : It's an
12 indicator'of tumorigenic -pol .ycyclic hydrocarbons,
13 b t~Wynder and Hoffmann_'s own data show that's the
14 wrong,conceptg
it,your opinion ; as you sit here

W 5
7 7
16 today, that phenols then play no role in the
17 biological activity that is caused by cigarette
18 smoke?
19
20 been' ; done in animals, there has been some work
21 that ahows it' :doe's promote, there's some work that

Ln
22 shows .it doesn't promote, there's some work that ~
m
23 shows it's a cocarc .inogen, and some that shows it,,,
- ~
24 ien't-a c?ocarcinogen : And all that work has beea OD
25
WAGA & SPINELLT (201) 992-4111

g 637
1 Well, isn't,it true that most of the
work related to cancer,research has been done in
re3ied upon animal studies to make, certain
conclusions with respect to compounds involved in
smoke?
9 A. Yes . ; And of course,,one of the things is
10 about that is ;that you may, as I do, disagree with
11 trying to extrapolate from a mouse skin painting
12 experiment to inhaling smoke as an aerosol . One,
13 you've got a eolution of a thick gummy substance,
14 theòther is an aerosol .- `You can't extrapolate
15 That has been .a',,-- a no-no since 1941 .
16 4 How'did you know that -- that phenols
17 were potentially`,promoters?
18 A . This man Boutwell had this article .in the -
19 Q And` `what method did he use to
20 determine they were po"ntial promoters?
21
Ln
N
22 with a level'of polycyclice that normally wouldn't
23 give a very .`high percent tumor bearing animals .
24 And if he painted t .hem .at the same time -- or
25 . . sequentially with solution of phenol, following
(201) 992-4111
Vol . , Pg . 638
the :poiycyclic painting, then the polycyclic
seemed to behave like there was a lot more of it
3 there, or it_promoted the effect .
4 Well,'if -- and I :think your testimony
or Reynolds did not do any
6 testing on ita'own of the phenols, correct?
,Right .
Q . And if you were just reviewing
, test
10 ,painting of mice, why wouldn't you tell Reynolds
11 not=to be concerned about it, because you can't
12 extrapolate`thoee results to the human experience?
13 Well, I think,ìf .you read some of the things
14 wrote, that's what-I'implied in a lot of it .
15 But, then again, I also pushed, as you probablyy
16 are-aware, that I thought we should be doing some
17 biological work ourselves, because some of it was
18 actually very poorly done .
19 Wee had developed or, ;:if you wil.l,
20 acquired, a fairly good reputation`from our work
21 in chemistry of smoke ;and tobacco -- smoke

Ln
H
~
22 analysis/tobacco analyeis, and I felt-we could do ~
m
23 1 t he same thing in the biological area .
24 Q .Why ;was the why were the test
251 results, in and of themselves, the test results
WAC3A & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 639
1 'arising from :the'moude akin painting of the
phenols,'enough : :to-Convince you to advise Reynolds
rrot, to exp3 .ore using phenols as flavorants?
,_ Well, here again,
things that happened :in-'54, or '52, '53, '54,
'56. . Benzpyr,ene,` :for example, got to be a term
that was altnost, ;ae aCary to people as the word
cancer . And I felt : Wel1, gee, we got enough
9 problem .with thia,term .' Let's not start
10 introducing something that could go to a quinone
11 and-have another problem that would be our doing .
12 as I eay, .I was frankly surprised,
13 wher;i here' s a man'that' ;s been there three or four
14 months, walks into .research management and says :
15 Hey, . .here's some,_articles ; .I don't think we should
16 use 'these . ''And they say :
17 won't use them .
18 Q. Who did :you specifically talk to?
19 Dr . Senkus'and Mr . Hoover, my manager and the
20
21 0 Was your, -- was your opinion that
22 those shouldn't`be explored based upon your
23 your scientific belief that there were
24 health risks related to those compounds, or was it
25 . based upon your belief :that it wasn't worth
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 640
1 getting into because the public thought there were
2 health risks related'to .itd
3 Well, I thought why stir up another mess that
we were -- like the-one,we're already into with
-the'polycyclics :
mean, I ;was convinced the
had discovered benzpyrene and saya there isn't
a'problem . The American
10 Association for Canoer_Research said the same
11
12 When?
13 t i '84 . I've
14
15 What 'did 'they say?
16 That there'a no compoundìn cigarette smoke
17 that :can be attributed_as a cause of cancer . .
18 Something in those words . J . W . Cook said the
19 same` thing, Do11- .and Hill and' -- Doll and Peto
20 said the same thing . Doll is the guru of
21 statistical standings :`
Ln
22 And ; as
. ..
I. say, Wynder and Hoffmann, '~
. . . ~. .. ~ ~ - . ~ . '~. F..
23 and Fred Bock, and Benjamin Van- .Duuren pr o ba bl y ~~

; ,r,
[ IN
Ln
24 have said that 30 times in thee last 30 years . N
25 You're`saying that'they :said that

Vol . 4, Pg . 641
there cannot be a compound that is the cause of
cancer?
3 A . What they say is you cannot explain the
animal experiments on .skin painting with the
5 .composition of smoke as dictated by polycyclic
hydrocarbons or benzo[alpyrene .
Q That group,was not'suggesting, were
they, and they did_not suggest,'that there was not
a'statisticalj.link .be;tween smoking and certain
10 forms of cancer?
11 Oh, no . Nc
12 Q . You agree that--there was definitely,
13 even by '56, a statistical link between smoking
14 and cancer?
15 A . A statistical association .
16 Q Isn't it-,more fair to say that what
17, that'group was, .e'aying was that"th.ere was no
18 specific compound that could be identified as the
19 specific cause of,the cancer?
20 guess you might_,say that,
21 after this four-month period
22 where you were working on phenols as a flavorant,
23
24 it surprised me .
25 was told to'drop the phenol
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 642
pxoject, that they said : What do you want to
work on?' And I said, well -- you know, I think
it's in something I wrQte someplace : I said :
What .we're selling is smoke . I would like to do
5 work ; on amoke_ composition .
,And because so little was known, as
I told you,'about the :article by Alvin Kosak and
8 the 90-something compounds .
So I set upFa whole . system of
10 examining smoke ;' the'smoking machine was patterned
11 after :that of :Dr . Wynder's And we set out t
12 look at tobacco .smoke,And between examining the
13 composition of tobacco .~'s°moke and finding ways to
14 modify it, it t-ook 'the'next ten years .
15 Q What was your beginning goal in
16 '-looking at smoke composition?
17 Well, I've already told you that I had worked
18 out a-p ;rocedure for ;,isolating and identifying
19 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from my work at
20 the' `Banting- and Best : And I was so f irmly
21 convinced that all this controversy was a bunch
22 nonsense, that the first thing I did was go after
23 the polycyclic hydrocarbons --
24 Q Were-you --
25 -- and settle the issue once and for all, in
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 643
my mind, that,they"were there in very low levels .
2 We actuallyìsolated the benzopyrene in
crystalline form . : First time that had"ever been
done .
Q . You were convinced that the
controversy ;was nonsense . Was that before or
after you began-at Reynolds?
Well, I really had nothing to do with medical
emok~e until I-got to Reynolds . And, as I say,
10 when I started reada .ng -a little more about it and
11 suddenly realized some people were saying no, they
12 can't there and, yes ;'they can be there . And I
13 thought, the background of everything that had

..
14 been done since the mid '30s, there was no way
15 they could not be'there .
16 Q . I'm talking specifically about the
17 polycyclic
18 }That's what I'm talking about .
19 0 Carbo -- polycyclic hydrocarbons . Did
20 you, before you began at Reynolds, ever express in
21 writing that you-believed that t he polycyclic
22 carbohydron hydrocarbon controversy was
23 nonsense?
24 A. Ln
251 MR . SLANCATO ; I'm going to object to

Vol . 4, Pg . 644
the form .
3 Q . Did you ever express, before you began
at Reynolds, orally that you believed that the
polycyclic hydrocarbon .controversy was nonsense?
Well, in my-work at the Banting, as I said, I
did :a lot of work in polycyclic hydrocarbons, and
would have "occasiori :, .to talk with my boss there,
9 Dr . .Franks . And of'° .course he was very
1, 0 knowledgeable in''polycyclics . And there were
11 papers that were~appearing,in some of the chemical

.,
12 j ournale and talkxng _about the presence of
13 polycyclics in their .;,'-- in cigarette smoke . And
14 then,there were papere .saying, well', they couldn't
15 fa.nd it .
16 And in our•
17 We11, the curves tha't'these people have, spectral
18 curves, .really don't tell you that they claim to
19 be polycyclics, really don't show that it is, they
20 were so poor, and this was Dr .'Fieser's criticism
21 in 1957 . And between us, I said : Hell -- pardon
22 my language . Heck, there's no way they can't be
23 there, from all we knew about how-they were formed
24 0c)
25 0
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 645
.controversy was . Was the controversy --
2 The controversy was whether they were there
6 controversy as to whether
or not they were tumor-promoting or tumorigenic?
Well, if there was a controversy about
9 whether they were there or not there, you have to
10 prove that-they were there,to find out which ones
11 were there before you'could say : Well, if you had
12 a dozen polycyclics, which ones had ever been
13 tested?
14 Q . So your -- when you say this ten-year
15 project, you -- at the end of this ten years, were
16 you'convinced one way or-the other as to the,
17 quote, controversy, unquote?
18 A. was convinced that there was no
19 controversy in 1956 .when we isolated them .
20 Q . So the controversy you're referring to
21 that was resolved in your own mind -- or resolved
22 earlier but confirmed ten years later, was that cn
M
23 they are there? m
~
24 I knew that in '56 . . 1 said -- I think you're ~
cn
-1
251 misinterpreting my talking about --
WAGA & SPINELLI . (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 646
1 I think I-did .
2 A. about the ten-year period . What we did,
once we :were there, we .did a great deal of work on
4 how .could we diminish'them . And as -- one of the
things"that a lot of people were doing in labs all
over the place, was trying,to reduce polycyclics
7 specifically . And -l'_m sure we 'll get into the
fact that, when you .zry,that'with any class of
compounds in cigarett .e'smtike, you'run into a
10 problem .
11 4 Why were you trying to reduce them?
12 Well, here again, you had everybody saying
13 these things about polycyclics and they were
14 tumorigenic to mouse skin or on subcutaneous
15 injection, and the best way to shut up the people
16 complaining was to say, okay, let's get them out
17 of there or diminish them . They're not flavorful,
18 or at least most of them aren't . . Some of the
19 lower molecular rate :polycyclics are flavorful .
20 One of'~`them used to be ;ueed in mothballs :

,
21 Naphthalene .
,
22 Q . Was your'research to reduce the
23 polycyclic hydrocarbons related to your personal
24 Oesire•to make cigarettes-safer or to reduce the
25 controversy around polycyclic hydrocarbons?

Vol . 4, Pg . 647
A . Probably part .;and parcel of both . When we
2 started the first,study on ways to reduce
polycyclic .hydrocarbons, we -- the polycyclic
hydrocarbons have to come from something in the
5 tobacco . Now, tkiere .had been a big controversy
whether they got there by"atmospheric pollution,
'by stuff settling on .the leaves in the fields
the big contr:oversy, well, all the
polycycl .ice came'from the cigarette paper and this
10 type of thing . 'But those
11 another group that thought,the :polycyclics came
12 rettee with a match, the burning
13 of 'tY}e wood "in '`the mat-ch, or the hexane in the
14 .cigarette`ligh"ter .
15 Well, ` it
16 well, it come from something in the tobacco . And
17 i't was determined there were things in tobacco
18 that-'would give more polycyclics than cigarette
19 paper and so on . So,ìf we got rid of those, the
20 polycyclic levels'wou1d go down . And the way we
21 did that was .toI extract what is called precursors .
22 Well, unbeknownst to us, for some

J
23 . time, Dr . Wynder was'working on the same project .im
24 And ' the way I found out that waa,because, as I
25 said, my major professor did all the chemistry
NELLI
Vol . 4, Pg . 648
with Dr . -- for Dr . Wynder, until he got
2 Dr . Hoffmann . And .I .found out that they're
working on extraction the same as we .are .
And in ..1960
Dr . Wynder, at a meeting in Atlantic City, said :
6 We'+ve given up on extraction ; it's economically
7 and :practically unfeasible .
8 Well, we had given -- we gave it up
too, for the :same -- for part of the same reason .
10 But- .the second part of the reason was that, when
11 you take out the precursors, you end up raising
12 .the :level of the non-soluble parts of tobacco,
13 like cellulose"and lignin ; they get to be a larger
14 percentage of the filler .- And one of the main
15 source of phenols Is`lignin, which is non-soluble
16 in'the`solvents that we .used . So did you want to
17 lower polycyclics and raise the .-phenols when there
18 was still a13l thie chatter abo'ut,phenols being a
19 problem?
20 The .other
21 soluble in t he solvents used for the extraction .
22 And, as we suepected, if 'you' left the nitrates
23 there, their`ratio in the residue -- : extracted
24 residue would increase, so you'd effectively
25 increase the nitrosamines in smoke . So do you
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 649
r
want to lower one thing and raise two?
So we said, "To heck with it," and
3 went on to something .else .
4 Q . At what point in time in your ten
years of your research`did you say'"to heck with
it," or was that after ten .years?
No . We did that about 1960, somewhere around
there . We looked, at .extraction for about three
years, and was actually so serious about it, we
10 had A major engineering company design a plant to
it, when we thought it was a good way to go .
12 But when we figured out that there were more -- it
13 would raise more problems than .it would solve, we
14 ended that .
15 Was there any -- you referred to a
16 ten-year period andÌ just want to be clear in my
17 mind . What were you talking about,' .that ten-year
18 period?
19 Well, the ten=year period was from '54 to
20 '64', early '65, somewhere in there . . We were under
21 Hoover was the director
22 of D ,Senkus was a manager and then he u,

N
~
23 wasàseistant director of, research . And we did a ~..~
m
24 lot~ of t-hings on_smoke-composition, polycyclics,
251 , phenols, ciliastate, nitrosamines, and we looked
WAGA & SPINELLI . (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 650
at,'different ways to ;-- ;we concentrated, mostly,
on`the polycyclic business . And everything we
3 came,up with,~where we tried to look at --
reduce things specifically, selectively, in other
5 words, only the polycyclics, only the phenols, we
ran ;into a trouble that we'-- if you lower one
thing, you were raising something else .
SO we went•to a philosophy : If you're
going-to make a safer cigarette, less hazardous
10 cigarette, lower everything as near, :in proportion
11 as you can . And the""work on, if you will, the
12 less hazardous cigarettes, everybody was looking
13 at it . And the interesting thing -- it may not be
14 interesting to you . But in 1960 D . Wynder came
I 15 out with an article and said the --àt this point
16 in time, the four cigarette design technologies
17 significant in making a less haza,rdous cigarette
18 are°the blend, the-'filter tip, paper porosity, and
19 reconstituted tobacco sheet .
20 Now, . if you look historically at those
21 four, the first blended cigarette, called the

1i
22 "American blend, was introduced in 1913 by R .J .
m
23 Reynolds Tobacco Company . And, subsequently,
24 after 1957/58,' it .was shown that a blended
251 cigarette was less -- smoke was less tumorigenic
WAGA & SPINELLI ` (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 651
1 to mouse skin, its .benzpyrene content was less,
2 its phenols were less, .so on and so forth . The
-second, on filtration --
4 Q . Less carcinogenic than what?
A . . Pardon?
R Did you say .less carcinogenic?
7 Less :tumorigenic to mouee skin .
The second one, filtration, the first
success .really .succes.sful cigarette acceptable
10 o the consumer was the Wineton, 1953, introduced
11 by`R . . .J . Reynolds Tobacco Company . There had been
12 filter .cigarettes,, but'they were 1-ess than one
13 percent of the market .
14 When the'Winston came out, the filter
15 tip cigarette took off like a skyrocket .
16 Well, the-other thing that the Winston
17 cigarette had, and wnich was also'incorporated
18 into t he other Reynolds brands, was reconstituted
19 tobacco sheet . Reconstituted tobacco :,sheet had
20 been used as a wrapper for cigars . But no
21 successful one .'had e,ver_been made that was
22 t for
r
23 did'it . Dr . Samuel Jones invented it .
24 The third ' one was paper porosity, that
25 you lowered the tar'and nicotine and everything

Vol . 4, Pg . 652
1 else by having paper that let the air flow through
it fast .
So .the ;first four things that were
ever introduced, that Wynder and Hoffmann said
5 were signif .icant, all came out of R .J . Reynolds
6 Tobacco Company .
7 Q . Of those four items -
8 A. And they were a1l copied by everybody else,
within three years of~their introduction .
10 Q . Those four items that you mentioned,
11 were they originally"developed as health ideas?
12 they weren't . But, you know, it is, if
13 you will, serendipity, good fortune, that they all
14 worked out to be that way .
15 Q, Have,you seen any documents in your
16 employment or consulting relationship with RJR
]. 7 that would . ;suggest that- any of those four things
18 e,-further developed as a potential -- let me
19 start over .
20 The .'
21 you said`they did not start out with the
22 concept that 'they would be health-related benefits
23 to 'smoking?
24 Well, obv .iously the blend one in 1913
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 653
Q . . Did you ever see any,documents at RJR,
during your employment or during your consulting
period, that'suggested that there wouid be health
benefits to theae :four._items that ..should be
exptored?
y. ;
A ." `"Not "that- I .recall . It may have been
;merit'ioned, after•~the`-whole concept of -- when
Dr . Wynder .talked :about'lowering the tar he did
soaie''work in 1957, and at the same time he did the
10 benzpyrene work . And his conclusions were : If --
it tar is the problem in smokers, then lowering
12 the tar by 40_percent would almost do away with
13 any respiratory tra'ct,problems . And that was in
14 hist testimony before the Blatnik Committee in
15 1957 .
16 there was a"look .at, you know,
17 if you increase the reconstituted
18 tob.acco sheet, that would lower the tar, which was
19 in agreement with what -- at least -- not i
20 agreement with, but complied with the things that
21 Dr ., Wynder was sayin.g .

~
22 Do you )Criow of any promotional ~
~
Im
23 campaigns that touted-either'blendg,~filter ti Pf
24 paper porosity, reconstituted tobacco°with
25 providing health benefits?
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, g . 654
No . As
anything . The fact that well, let's look at
reconstituted-tobacco .
4 . Now, ;ahat wae .introduce by 1953 . By
1958, everybody ;in the industry had copied, not
6 our .specific reconstituted tobacco sheet, but one
7 similar to it, that they either designed
themselves or`had,p.omebody`deeign for them, like
the"American Machine and Foundry .• Well, if you
10 look .at the curve of ;tar versus sales-weighted
11 average tar, it becomes obvious that that tar is
12 dropping, dropping, dropping ; and it's still
13 dropping : So, you know, if what Wynder says is
14 right, then we've done something in accord with
15 his wishes .
16 Q . Can you tell me any specific research

. , ,
17 that you were assigned to in that ten-year period
18 that the goal was to~-.develop a'safer cigarette?
19 1962, oneòf the people that worked for
20 me,' 'Dr . Fredricks:on, wrote a memo about tobacco
21 and how to, perhaps, generate a less hazardous Ln

~
~
22 cigarette . And his philosophy or proposal was : m
23 Put less tobacco in the cigarette . m

rn
24 And how do you do that .when you've go,
25 a certain dimension, you've got a thing that's
('201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 655
1 about the size of a pencil and it's so long, that
-you don't want toy drastically change the shape of
the,cigarette, but,how do you put less tobacco,
and'that .taking into account the filter? And he
said: Well,'make the tobacco lighter, y
expanding it .
And in his memorandum he points out
that, not only would .this generate considerable
9 revenue, but it would also lower the tar and
10 whateverèlae you were interested in and want
11 lowered, that were -- that 'people were possibly
12 saying that was responsible for this or that .
13 And he worked on it, got the patents
14 on it . We put it in ;the cigarettes, we licensed
15 it, everybody else copied ; those that weren't
16 licensing developed one'of their own . And that's
17 one of the eight_significant technologies listed
18 by the Surgeon General as contributing to a safer
19 cigarette . That, came out of R .J . Reynolds,
20 because we had the first' patents on it .
21 Q . And it's considered safer because each
22 cigarette has less tobacco in it?
23 No . Because ,the smoke has -- the smoke
24 generated by the cigarette ; according to the -
25 you've got to go back, I think, sir, to who

Vol . 4, Pg . 65 6
defined the safer cigarette . And it was a
cigarette -- the cigarette with expanded tobacc o
in it,fitted the definition of those who define d
safer cigarette . . Tar was less tumorigenic to
5 mouse skin ; tar was lowered . And the ratio of
certain ingredients to tar per milligram of tar
werelowered, and that included benzopyrene and
8 phenol and whatever else you wanted .
9 nd, as I. .eay, all you got to do i s
10 look at the Surgeon :4eneral's report for 1979 ,
11 1981, and thereit gives you a list of eigh t
12 technologies, seven of which came out o f
13
14 Which isthe only one that didn't ?
15 not the first who incorporate d
16 ventilated filter tips into a cigarette ; I thin k
17 American Tobacco Company was . But we utilized i t
18
19
20 tip, paper`porosity, reconstituted tobacco . Wha t
21 .are the other four ?
22 in ;sequence ,
2 3
24 phenols, which, by the way, also take out volatil e
251 nitroeamines : The othex was paper additive, th e
WAC3A & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 657
1 seventh was .expanded .tobacco, and the last one
introduced was venti,lated filter tipe .
Q . Is it your suggestion that RJR did
research and used these areas to develop a safer
cigarette?
A .- Well, we -- we fitted it into the same type
of_program, if you-will~` that the National --
National Cancer'Inst,itute called .their less
hazardous --'~its lees .~hazardous cigarette program .
10 Q . Did'RJR act,ually ._have a less hazardous
11 cigarette program?
12 Well, we incorporated all these things -- I
13 mean, there was :a great deal of research that went
14 into expanded tobacco, for example . We did the
15 chemistry of the smoke, very detailed chemistry .
16 We,.did the biology~ "of -the smoke on skin painting
17 study . Our .results on the biology -- biology of
18 the smoke -- ;bioa`ssay of the . smoke were checked
19 and confirmed in the NCI study . They,were also
20 checked and,confirmed in Germany by a man called
21 Dontenville . And if you look at the definition
22 that` came out in the`late '50s of what a safer

F"
m
23
24
25 Q
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 658
cigarette"?
A . I don't have . a definition, sir .
Q . Do you believe there is a safer
cigarette?
. We .used the definition that Dr . Wynder and
Hoffmann and Bock came-- :up with in,the '60s
early ',60s, late 50s .
Q . I'm talking about you, individually .
Do-you be3 .iede there"is a safer cigarette?
10 well, - as I say, I'm not too sure
11 cigarettes are that ;unsafe . But
12 Q. Okay .~ guess that's a good starting
13 point . Do you believe cigarettes are unsafe?
14 , Cigarettes are .unsafe? No, I don't believe
15 ciga'rettes' are unsafe .
16 Q . : Do you believe that there are no
17 health risks related,to,smoking?
18 A. . Well, there is t .he association between
19 smoking and :certain diseases .
20 Q. Do you .believe that's a valid
21 association?
22 MR . BLANCATO : . Object to the form .
23 THE WITNESS : I'm not that much of
24 expert, sir, on statistics . But the -- I'm
251 aseuming that the - - most of the incidences, the

Vol . 4, Pg . 659
methodology and :so .on, .,would indicate an
association .
BY MR . MAISTROSt
4 Q The association you're referring to is
5 just a statistical one?

6 On the samples that were done, yes .
And the fact that you-recognize
8 there's a statistical association between smoking
and certain diseases does not convince you in
10 any way that cigarettes are unsafe or smoking is
11 unsafe?
12 I'm not sure . I won't -- I will not equate
13 association with cause and effect, if that's what
14 you're looking for .
15 Q . You don't think there's enough
16 biological, chemical, analytical research out
17 there to establish a link between smoking and
18 certain forms of cancer?
19 . Well, you talk about biology . According to
20 the what you should look for in bioassays ia .
21 Can : you induce thee aame kind of tumor by the same
22 route that you get in humans? And you can't do
23 that with inhalation of cigarette smoke . Yet you
24 can`do the .same thing_with the exposed mice, for
25 example, by inhalation to .the same level of diesel
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 660
exhaust fumes, at the same level as you do with
cigarette smoke, and you will get squamous cell
carcinoma in the mice that you don't .get with
4 cigarette smoke .
Q When you were in Canada for those
6 seven years, you did :mice and rat and some chicken
7 studies?
8 A . Well, as I
Q You were involved in them?
10 A . I was involved with them at -- I did the
11 chemistry of'the things they wanted to use in the
12 animal work .
13 Q If during the course of those studies,
14 you were, I asoume,youu were doing those for some
15 purpose . In other words, if you saw .that
16 certain compound would cause cancer in a mouse,
17
18 MR .'MCDERMOTT :
19
20 I mean,
21 .relevant information to know that a .compound
22 promotes tumors .in a mouse?
23 Weli, here again, tumor promotion is an
24 entirely different thing, sir, than tumor
251 initiation .
WAGA & SPINELLI, (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 661
But beyond that point is -- we already
knew ;that the compounds that we were working with
were either very potent in the way they caused
tumors, either on skin :'painting or subcutaneous
injection or intraperitoneal injection .
Q . You were doing animal testing, were
you,not, back in '47 to °'53, so that you can draw
sonte,conclusions upon the biological activity of
c,ertain compounds? .
10 A . Well, we were interested in the fact that the
11 serum' we were ge:n.erating, the vaccine we were
12 generating, would it stop the production of tumors
13 in :the animals that, we knew we were going to cause
14 tumors in .
15 Q, Let's take>4t another way . Why did
.16 you want RJR, in '54 ., to develop it's own in-house
17 animal research laboratories?
18 A . I didn't say`that in 154 .
19 Q. Okay ; when'did you say that?
20 A . . . I don't know . Late '50s, early '60s .

~
21 Q. Why did .you want R .J . Reynolds to
~
~
22 develop its own in-house animal testing in the w
23 late 'S4s, earYy ;'60s? :
24 . Well, one of the`reasons, as I said, was, if
251 you look at what Reynolds did from 1952, when they

Vol . 4, Pg . 662
1 began to augment their research capability, we had
2 developed -- Reynolds had developed quite a
3 reputation in the field of tobacco composition,
tobacco and smoke a,nalysis . And then, when we got
into the smoke :composition work, where -- when I
started it in '54, by_1960, we had quite a
reputation for our skills in these .areas . And if
8 you looked at some of the stuff in the literature
9 on biology,-some of it was very poorly done . And
10 I felt : Let's do i`t, develop the expertise to do
11 it properly, and it may be more meaningful .
12 And one of the things -- you may not
13 realize this either,' that if you go to a meeting
14 and somebody's giving a talk on animal studies,
15 and!it doesn't necessarily have to be on tobacco
16 smoke, but usually we were interested in what
17 pe ople were saying in that area, and you asked a
18 question of,Dr . Wynder or Dr . Bock from Roswell
19 Park in`Buffalo, t he first thing they would look
20 and'say : Gee, there's~:Alan Rodgman from Reynolds
21 or Joe Smith from someplace else :, And they would
22 ask'the question : Was your question an outgrowth
23 ot fiomething you noticed .in your work? And of
24 course you were stuck . If you hadn't done any
25 biological work, you could .say : Well, I haven't
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 663
1 done any ; and'they'd i ust ignore your question .
Q . Up to this .,_point in time, had Reynolds
contracted with .outside laboratories to do such
4 work?
5 A . -No, I-don't think,so . I was trying to think .
6 That'didn't happen,until the '60s, I guess .
7 Q : Which companies -~ in the '60s, when
8 you decided to recommend that Reynolds develop
more biological in-house research, which companies
10 were doing biological in-house research?
11 A . . Well, when I first recommended -- or
12 recommended the acquisition of a biological
13 capability through bioassays and so on, nothing
14 happened for a while . But, then, I guess it was
15 about the mid '60s, we actually formed a group,
16 you know, that did some biological work . Not
17 necessarily all on tobacco smoke either, because
18 of some other ongoing things at Reynolds .
19 Andìn addition to some in-house work,
20 we had some work done at'various -- Bio-Research
21 in Chi,cago,
22 Do you know which tobacco companies
23 were ;doing in-house biological research when
24 Reynolds was not? w
25 . At that time I didn'
WAGA'& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . g . 664
Q . When`did you first recommend that
Reynolds develop biological research in-house?
MR . MCDERMOTT :
THE WITNESSs I-guess it was late '62,
really, in May_;
Q . And when did they develop in-house
biological research?
In '65 . They started to acquire the staff .
10 And one of the problems, you know, you say -- you
11 don't jump into doing biological work overnight,
12 sir . You've got to get the staff, you've got to
13 get .a facility . A biological facility is -- is
14 not just like putting your kitchen together . ; it's
15 quite an elaborate setup . And it took time to get
16 that all done, and get the appropriate staff, and
17 get things started .' And, as I say, all of the
18 biological work that was done, underway, was not
19 all on cigarette smoke .
20 Q . Who was in charge of the efforts to
21 put_together sophisticated biological research Ln

~
22 capabilities within RJR in 1965? ~
m
23 A. A man called Dr . Eldon Nielson, E-L-D-O-N,
24 N-I+E-L-S-O-.N ., I ;guess .it is .
25 What role did you play in that

Vol . 4, Pg . 665
project?
A . None . I was just glad to see they were
getting a move on .
Q . And the primary benefit you saw, at
least, was so that'you could be more knowledgeable
when'you attended these seminars?
Well, that would have been a help . But
the~-- one of our problems had been, we do all the
chemistry of ways to control smoke and lower this
10 and that, and we sort of had to rely on people
11 doing the same thing outside and then seeing what
12 they did with the animal work, their animal work,
13 because they could do both . This way, if we were
14 .doing them both in-house, we could probably speed
15 up our knowledge reserve, and so on and so forth .
16 Q . And is it your testimony, that prior
17 to the development of this biological laboratory
18 in 1965, that Reynolds did not have'any in-house
19 capabilities to either confirm or deny the
20 biological work that'was being done by third
21 parties?
22 MR . MCDERMOTT : Object to the form of
23 the question .
24 THE WITNESS : I don't think they did .

Vol . 4, Pg . 666
0 When I say Reynolds, I mean either
in-house or by contracting it out .
m really -- I don't remember them going
outeide . I think they may .have for some things,
but I don't'remember them going outside .
Q . When, if,you could put the year -- if
you could put a year to it ; if it's an unfair
question, tell me . When do you think Reynolds
first had the capabilities to personally examine
10 the biological activity of smoke?
11 Probably -- oh, ;I'11 say '60s . Let's say it
12 took them a year and a half to get everything
13 staffed and so on . Probably late '66 or early
14 167, somewhere in there .
15 Q . And the in-house biological research
16 that was developed in`'66/'67, did that continue
17 through the time you left RJR?
18 . No . The -- some of the biological work was
19 terminated in 1970 .
20 Q, What "some" of it?
21 Pardon?
22 Q . What "some" of it?
23 Well, I'm sure you're referring to all the
24 fuss about the 1970 supposed closing of a Mouse
25 House . But there were several things going on in
WAaA .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 667
the biologica] . areatthat -- for example, we were
in the proc'ess of considering a liaison with a
,pharmaceutical .Gompany ; Warner Lambert, I think it
was . We also were doing biological work -- and
with that regard ; we were -- had looked at some
6 compounds I forget whether they came from
7 tobacco or smoke, ._ We were looking at the
8 biology -- bioaseay of them as
9 cho.lesterol-reducing compounds . And so there were
10 several people working-on that .
11 The`n, .there was another group who were
12 working on what was called the isomerase project,
13 Which actually wa`sà bacteriological project of
14 way to convert'glucose to a mixture of glucose and
i5 fructose . And,~ nowa;days, if you look at Coke or
16 Pepsi or soft drinks or ice cream, you'll notice
17 that t hey all .contain what's called liquid sugar,
18 which is a mixture of glucose and fructose,
19 produced by a similar system . Reynolds has its
20 own developed'its own system for a company
21 called Penick `& 'Ford .
22 Now,` Penick & Ford was also a seller
23 'starch compounds, and`some of them, of course,
24 were> used in `foods,' ,some' were used as coatings on
25 paper, so on .' So they were a group testing the

Vol . 4, Pg . 668
compounds that were used -- that would have been
2 taken in by people .
3 And then . .t here were, of course, people
4 working on the effects of cigarette smoke . And
5 then there was another group -- the Council for
6 Tobacco Research was'looking for a smoking machine
to use, to expose'animals to inhalation . It's
8 called the "nose only exposure method," where the
beast gets the smoke"`right at his nose and mouth .
10 And `Reynolds designed one .
11 So there were people -- biological
12 people working on the design of that machine with
13 people from the electronic -- electrical
14 department . And'all the companies, I think, made
15 one . I think Lorillard had one, we had one -- I
16 don't know if Philip Morris had one or not . But
17 itènded up the Council for Tobacco Research
18 didn't pick any of ours, they picked a machine
19 called the Walton smoking machine .
20 So, contrary to what has been said
21 about what went on in the -- all these articles in
22 the newspaper that the whole biological group was

I cn
23 terminated, ' it was terminated because they were ~
N
m
24 all'' .working on cigarette smoke, their notebooks
~
OD
251 were taken and''`dest"royed ; it was a bunch of m

Vol . 4, Pg . 669
nonsense . And if you want to take :the time, I
2 think I could go .through and demonstrate to you
3 how-much nonsense it`really was . If I haven't
already .
For example,` they said the only people
terminated were biological . There were at least
eight people who were not biologically oriented .
Some of them were analytical chemists, some of
9 them were organic chemists, working on a flavorant
10 synthesis, analytical chemists, wasn't terminated .
11 And ; :the other thing abnut it was .there were about
12 12 people, including Dr . Nielson, who stayed on
13 after that, all biologi .cally oriented, except one .
14 Q . Who's that?
15 A man called Fred Wendelboe . He was doing
16 some analytical .chemistry for the biological
17 people .and went to the -- back to the
18 biological -- went back to the analytical group .
19 But the interesting thing is that some
20 f .the .people in :the biological area, they were --
21 according to people,who said everybody was gone,
22 a`re still there . In .fact, one of them is giving
23 two papers at the Tobacco Chemists Conference next
24 week .
25 Who is=that?
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 670
1 Riley Davis . Riley, R-I-L-E-Y, Davis . Fred,
2 Wendelboe is still there .
The-other interesting thing, the same
4 people who were saying Reynolds was so nasty in
5 getting rid of all this stuff about smoking and
health, three of,them came back : Dr . Bruce,
Dr . Colucci, and Dr . Simmons . And Dr . Simmons is
still there . And"why would you come back if
9 ~things were so ;ugly? :
10 MR .`BLANCATO : Would this be a good
11 time for a break?
12 MR . MAI9TROS : Just a couple of
13 minutes .
15 Q . What` was so"uglyo
16 mean, one-of those three
17 peo, ple said that~_th .ey destroyed his notebooks,
18 which he had to admit wasn't true' . He was the one
19 that gave the_ .interviews that said everybody in
20
21 R . Who'e that?
Ln
Colucci . ~
22 J
F-+
I
m
23 MR . MAIS .TROSs Do you want to take a ;
, ~
~
CO
24 break? N
25 MR . BLANCATO : Yes .

Vol . 4, Pg . 671
VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going off the
record at 2 :23 p .m .
(Recess taken from 2 :23 p .m . to 2 :40
p .m,)
VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going back on the
record at 2 :40 p .m .
Q. Dr,; Rodgman, in 1970, the biological
research laboratory, if you will, at RJR was
10 shut down, was it not?
11 Yes .
12 Q . Where was it located?
13 A . It was located across the street from the -
14 the main research building .
15 Q . What was the building called where
16 biological research was done?
17 . People called it "the Mouse House," but it
18 probably had a more sophisticated name .
19 Q. Was there anything else in the
20 building, other than biological research?
21 Not that I know of .
22 Q Were there any employees in the
23 .building, other .than biological research
24 employees?
25 A . Well, now,'it depends on when you were there .

Vol . Pg . 672
For example, the people that were working on the
2 design of the inhalation smoking machine would go
over there and they'd pop animals in and they
wouid adjust things in :the computer, and so on and
But I was never really that much
7 involved, so -- other than that one thing, I don't
know who who wae in another building .
Q . Who made t he decision to close the
10 biological research laboratory referred to as the
11 "Mouse Houee
12 A . `` I have no idea
13 Q Who .was,in charge of biological
14 research in 1970 at Reynolds?
15 A .` Dr . Èldon,Nielson . ;
16 Q What happened with the animals that
17 were being biologically researched at the Mouse
18 House?
19 I have no idea .
20 Q . Never heard any stories?
21 No .
22 Q• Not even rumors, hearsay, cocktail
23 party conversation?
24 I don't,even remember reading it in the
25 articles in the Greensboro newspaper, when there

Vol . 4, Pg . 673
were five articles, I think, spread over a week, a
page and a half each .
3 Q :, Did youèver see any memos that
4 described why the Mouse House was shut down?
5 N
6 Q Do you`know if they did any research
in the Mouse House that would establish a link
n between cigarette smoke and any form of tumors or
9 cancer?
10 No .
11 Q . Do you know what kind of biological
12 research they were doing in the Mouse House?
13 . Would you rephrase that, please?
14 Q . Do you know what kind of biological
15 research they were"doing in the Mouse House?
16 A . Well, as I,mentioned before, they were doing
17 some things on cholesterol reducing drugs, on
18 inability or toxicity of starch derivatives that
19 would be in food .' And of course this isomerase
20 thing, they had,to make sure that the liquid sugar
21 you ended up with was -- didn't have bacteria in
22 it, the one that was causing the isomerization . , Ln

~ ~-4
~
~
23 And I'believe they did some work on ciliastasis,
24 cigarette smoke and ciliastasis . , ,0p.

OD
' Ln
25 Q . What is ciliastasis?

Vol . 4, Pg . 674
Well, the cilia are small, little hair-like
things that are in your lung . And I guess the
3 best :-way to describe them is they move in the --
synchronously,` like a wave, you know . On the
surface of -- the tips of these things is -- is a
layer of fluid . And if you get anything in your
lung, particles, smoke particles, .dugt, these
8 little cilia wiggle in a rhythmic motion and move
that : fluid with,the . particles` in it up -- and you
10 endùp swallowing them . It brings them out of
11 your lung and you swallow them .
12 Well, it had been this -- after the
13 demise, if you wi11, .-,of the polycyclics, the
14 aza-arenes, the phenols, the next group were the
15 ciliastats, which were ;primarily in the vapor
16 phase of smoke, not in-the particles . And there
17 was some work .on that .
18 The exposure to these ciliastats, done
19 in vitro with clam cilia or a piece of lung tissue
20 extirpated out of a ;rabb .it, exposure to these
21 vapor phase parts of smoke slowed these down ;
22 sufficient concentration ended stopping
23 their little waving motion . In other words, you
24 were -- the claim was that the ciliastats in smoke
25 hindered the clearance mechanism of the lung .

Vol . 4, Pg . 675
1 And, as a result of that, one of the -- it was
2 written up a great deal in the Readers Digest and
3 so' .on, as the same time as the Lark cigarette came
out,'which had a,carbon filter which was supposed
;o take the ciliastats out of the smoke .
Well -- I think they were doing some
work :'on that . I'm not sure of that, but I believe
they were .
9 Unfortunately, by 19 .-- the end of,
10 1968 -- well, let,me,back up a little .
11 1965, Lawrence Cook-and I did some
12 experiments that showed that the compounds that
13 are supposedly responsible for ciliastasis or this
14 impairment,never reached the lung, or-very little
15 of them . They're all dissolved out of the mouth
16 the saliva, and then the laryngeal, and the
17 fluids coating the larynx .
18 We reported that, wrote it up ; it's in
19 some reports . But some other workers in Europe,
20 Da].hamn,' Edfords and Rylander, did it very
21 sophisticated ; very fancy equipment . Got
22 : essentially the same numbers that we did for the v+~

~
23 compounds that are considered ciliastats . And, as '0
24 a result, by the 1969,,1970, the whole carbon
25 filter cigarette'thing fell apart . It ended up
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 676
1 with -- I don't know, 13 brands going down to two,
2 the Reynolds' brand and the L & M brand, Lark and
3 Tempo .
And what-they were doing over in
the -- I think one of the things they may have
been doing, we had also found, Lawrence Cook and
that if you pass the smoke through a moist
8 system, that the water would take out the
9 ciliastats . In fact, there was a commercial
10 cigarette made with :that principle, that
11 encapsulated water .was included in the filter tip,
12 and before you smoked the cigarette, you crushed
13 the filter . The water came out of the capsule,
14 and when you smoked it through -- smoked the
15 cigarette, all the ciliastats were taken out .
16 But thatl all fell apart when it was
171 shown that the ciliastats, or very little of them,
18 ever got to the lung .
19 Q Now, did RJR do research to establish
20 that ciliastats : nevex'.' got to the" lung?
21 just told you .
22 Where is that published?
23 It's not published .
24 Q. Why not?
25 Well, shortly thereafter, Edfords and
(201) 992-4111
Vol . , Pg . 677
Rylander-came out with their publication, and
there it was .
3 R So'is it like medically not subject to
debate that ci3iastats -don't get to the lung?
I didn't say they didn't get to the lung . I
said the level that :>gets to.the lung is very much
reduced . Only about--a querter of them get there .
Q. How'many .cigarettes do you have to
smoke befor,e you .getà level that gets to the lung
10 .that matters?
11 I have no'' idea .
12
13 A . No . The thing is, the effect disappears
14 between cigarettes .
15 Q . Pardon me?
16 The effect disappears between cigarettes .
17 Q . Is there any health d :isease that you
18 would feel comfortable, sitting here today,
19 acknowledging as related to smoking?
20 MR . MCDSRMQTTs . "Related"?
21 MR . MAISTROS : Related .
22 THE WITNESS : I still didn't hear you?
23
24
25
WAaA ;& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 678
it .
s there any .adverse health
3 consequence, that you feel comfortable discussing
today, ;that is related or associated with smoking?
MR .' BLANCATO : Object to the form .
MR . MCDERMOTT : Object to the form of
the question .
around so much
10
11 4. Let me
12
13 There are certai•n people out there
14 that you've referred to as zealots or
15 I never used that word .
16 I forget what word you used,
17 opponents, proponents of theories, or anti-smoking
18 people, that would suggest that there are certain
19 diseases related to emoking . Are you aware of
20
21 Well,Ì've already said that there were

m
22 epidemiological-studies that indicated an
23 association .
24 Is there any health disease or adverse
251 health consequence that you, sitting here today,
WAdA`& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 679
1 feel comfortable stating that you believe, you
personally, not RJR, you personally believe is
caused by smoking?
4 o, I can't -think of anything .
5 Q . So as far as you' .re concerned, there
6 are .no adverse health consequences-that are caused
7 by smoking?
MR . MCDE,RMOTT : Object to the form of
9 the question .
10 THE WITNESS : Here, you come back to
11 .thie business of association and cause . It's been
12 my training that you cannot prove cause and effect
13 with statistics . You can prove association, but
14 not cause and effect . .
15 BY MR . MAISTROS
16 Q. Okay . So if I paint a million mice
17 with compounds that's contained in tobacco smoke,
18 and one million get cancer, you can draw no
19 conclusions from that, related to the human
20 experience?
21 . Only if you were to paint the human the same
22 way and get the same-response . And by the way,
23 there has been a akin painting study done with
24 humans and cigarette .smoke .
25 Q . The`prisoners you•talked about?

Vol . 4, Pg . 680
1 no . No .' That was with benzpyrene .
2 Who did the .human skin painting study?
There was a mari'here in the United States, in
1956 . .,: It's in Wyndev's boo•k ; he's got it
described . He did it for three or four months,
and then they'quit, : because they didn't see
anything .
I was surprised at reading that,
because I had~never realized that reference was in
10 existence .
11 Q Give me something that the average,
12 common :person can relate to that would establish
13 the distinction that you see'between association
14 and cause .
15 A . : Well, I think part ;of my problem, sir, is
16 that -- as I mentioned, I was collecting and
17 critiquing literature for the law department, and
18 whether it'sà fortunate`position or an
19 unfortunate position, by the time of the trial in
20 New Orleans, the Lartigue case, I had read
21 something like 20-something thousand articles on
22 all aspects, pro and con,òf smoking and health .
23 By the time I got out of that job and it was
24' actually turned over to Dr . Frank Colby,
25 probably had read 40,000 articles .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 681
1 Now, whether I am right or wrong --
the average person gets his knowledge from a front
page of the newspaper, a magazine, Time magazine
or whatever . If he`reads 52 issues of Time a
ye.ar, maybe three or five of them will have
smoking articles in . So z,think it's very
. ..difficult to pin down and say : Well, the average
8 ,person should know :what Alan Rodgman knows, or
9 vice ::verea . So I'm•not in a position to say what
10 the ` average person would f eel about it . I don' t
11 know if'that answers your question .
12 4•
13 The other thingàbout it, if you -- to jump
14 from aesociation'to cause and effect, maybe I'm
15 being the ultimate scientist, but there are
16 inconsistencies, even in the_epidemiological
17 studies considered taboo, to even say there's
18 something wrong with them .
19~ I've mentioned the Ochsner case . Why
20 is not Ochsner ever mentioned in the Surgeon
21 General's report, other than his first paper that
22 says cigarette smoking is associated or caused
23 by -- is a cause of lung cancer? All his
24 contradictory clinical data is omitted . Why does
25 Dr . Doll and Hill, in their first study, say they
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 682
can't explain why "the incidence of lung cancer
among people who said they did not inhale is
3 greater than,that in the people who say they
4 inhale .
5 Now, the American Cancer Society
6 sloughed that off and said : Well, the people
7 didn't understand the difference .between inhaling
8 and .not inhaling . B t Doll and Hill then went
on to do a study that,was a prospective study, in

. . . . . . 3 . , . .
10 which they started out with people, 57,000 to be
11 precise, that'they were going to get their smoking
12 habits and see what happens to them . They never
13 asked the question aboutìnhaling .
14 Now, you .may say, well, people might
15 not understand again ; but this was 57,000
16 physicians . You can't tell me'that you got 57,000
17 physicians that do not know the difference between
18 inhaling and not .inhaling .
19 And, of-course, if you want to look at
20 the chemistry, which I'm much more familiar with,
21 if you want to take the ;time, I can give you at Ln

F-A
a
22 m
~
23 Dr . . Bock, Van Duuren made an ~
24 on-t e front page -of the
25 newspapers that axe"wrong, some of which we showed
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 683
1 were wrong, some of`which they showed were wrong,
2 but they, to this day, have never retracted a one .
3 Q . Why is your former employer agreeing
4 to FDA regulation of nicotine?
MR . MCDERMOTT : Objection . No
foundation .
7 THE WITNESSs I don't know whether is
or not .
BY MR . MAISTROS :
10 Q . Let's°assume that the newspaper's
11 correct and they've agreed to be regulated by the
12 FDA as a drug . Why would they do that?
13 MR . MCDERMOTT : Objection . No
14 foundation .
15 THE WITNESS : I'm not an expert in the
16 nicotine . All I would say, that I think it's a
17 mistake .
19 Q .' Which is a mistake? You think they
20 should be settling these cases?
21 MR . BLANCATOs Object to the form .
22 MR . MCDERMOTT : Objection . No
23 foundation .
24 THE WITNESS : You want a personal
25 1 opinion?

Vol . 4, Pg . 68 4
1 MR . :MAISTROS : Yes .
THE WITNESS : No .
4 You think the settlement's foolish?
5 MR . BLANCATO : Objection to form .
6 THE WITNESS : I think it' s
inappropriate .
BY MR ;MAISTROS s
9 Why do you think its's inappropriate ?
10 A. just think it'sinappropriate .
11 Q . You don't think there's any reaso n
12 that the tobacco-companies should ever agree to
13 any regulation of its product by the FDA ?
14 MR . MCDERMOTT : . Objection :
15 foundation .
16 THE WITNESS : If you go.back in time,
17 at one time there was"a serious consideration of
18 the FDA handling tobacco products the way they do
19 other things, and some people had proposed that .
20 AndI don't know -- I don't think the tobacco
21 companies really had said much either way . But
22 the FDA said : We-don't want to do it . We don't
23 have the time ; we don't have the facilities ; w e
24 don''t have the knowledge .
25+ And that's history, sir . Bac k

Vol . 4, Pg . 685
1 sometime -- look up sometime in the '70s .
2 Q . Do you think that t he defense that's
3 asserted by the tobacco company's Freedom of
Choice -- first .of all, are you aware of the
defense, Freedom of Choice?
6 A. No . I'm not'that familiar with what's been
all this
Q Do you know what the defense of the
9 tobacco companies is in the Arch litigation?
10 No, I do not .
11 Q . You've not served in any capacity as a
12 consultant in the Arch litigation?
13 Only by being here .
14 Q . Have you assisted Womble Carlyle in
15 the :defense of the Arch case?
16 A . . By being,here ; I don't'know if this is
17 -helping them or hindering them . I don't know what
18 the -- what's involved in the Arch case, frankly .
19 Q. Have :you ever :written any memorandum
20 to`your managers, supervisors, higher-ups at
21 Reynolds, where you espouse the opinion that there
22 were health risks rel,ated to smoking?
23 . I have written things to them pointing out
24 that these views are held otherwise, and we should
25 be paying attention to them .

Vol . 4, Pg . 686
1 Q . But have you written anything
2 forget what other people have espoused . Have you
3 written anything where .you said I, Dr . Rodgman,
believe that the following health risks are
5 related to smoking?
6 A . Not that I remember .
7 Q . So, I just<want to understand the
playing field we're on'. You start from the
proposition that you don't personally believe
10 there'are health risks related to smoking?
11 MR .-MCDERMOTTs Object to the form of
12 the question . You're misstating or not accurately
13 summarizing his prior testimony . It speaks for
14 itself .
15 MR . MAISTROS : Tell me if I'm
16 misstating --
17 THE WITNESS : I think I've already
18 spoken to that .-
19 BY MR . MAISTROSs
20 Q . Do you have grandchildren?
21 A . Yes .
22 Q . Any of them smoke?
23 No .
24 Q . Do you have any concerns if they
251 started to smoke?

Vol . 4, Pg . 687
My sons - don' t smoke .
2 Q Wou1d yo:u have any ;concerns if your
g I randchildren smoked?
I believe that's their parents' problem, not
Q It wouldn't`concern you one way or
another if your grandchildren .smoked?
. Well, at their :present age ; .some of them are
three years old .
10 Q . The ones that are old enough to smoke,
11 would it concern you if they started to smoke?
12 Not particularly .
13 Q Did you ever do any research to
14 determine why people smoke?
151 That was outside my expertise, sir .
16 Most of my work'has been on composition of smoke,
17 control of it .
18 Q . What do you mean by "control"?
19 Just what we've'been talking about : Lowering
20 the composition delivery from'a cigarette,
21 compounds in the tar, and so on and`so forth .
22 Q . Any of the papers that you did on the
23 composition of amoke, did you turn those in to the
24 legal department for review?
25 A . Did I?

Vol . 4, Pg . 688
Yes .
2 A .. No .
Q. Anyone ever .review your work before it
was`published?
5 Oh, there was a set routine, that you
6 prepared the manuscript, submitted it to your
7 manager, manager took it to the director of
research, and then the-director of research either
9 approved-it there or, if he had some concern, he
10 might take it on .
-11 0 Did you ever submit any documents that
12 were returned, edited by anyone in the legal
13 department?
14 Edited?
15 Yes .
16 0
17 Q . Did you ever .have any manuscripts
18 returned, where suggestions were made that, when
19 you expressed certain views by anti-smoking
20 advocates, that you would highlight they were the
21 views of anti-smoking advocates as opposed to just
22 the views of a third person? Ln

F-A
~
23 No . N
m
Ob
24 MR . MCDERMOTT : Would you read back Ln
m
251 the question . There was a noise here . I didn't

Vol . 4, Pg . 689
quite hear the middle part of it .
MR . MAISTROS : He said, "No," but she
can do it again .
(Record read)
Q Now, have you heard of the Gentleman's
7 Agreement?
8 A . . .~Yee .
Q . What is the Gentleman's Agreement?
10 A. We talked about it at the last part of this
11 deposition . It was .:-- I heard about it in a round
12 about way . But no in-house animal work was part
13 of it, I think .
14 Did Reynolds abide by the Gentleman's
15 Agreement?
16 MR . MCDERMOTTs Objection .
171 foundation .
18 THE WITNESS : As far as I know .
20 Q. What was the reason for the
21 Gentleman's Agreement?
Ln
22 I have no idea . ~
~
~
23 MR . MCDERMOTT : Objection . m
~
24 Foundation .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, g 690
Q . Did you hear of a gentleman's
agrefement with respect to a safer cigarette?
A . I don't quite know what you mean .
Q . Was there ever a gentleman's
agreement, to your knowledge, with respect to, if
one tobacco company developed~a safer cigarette,
they'd share that-knowledge with other tobacco
companies?
. Oh . I was ~-,trying to think if -- Dr . Colby
10 and I gave a talk . That may have been in that --
11 so,me parts Frank put'in .
12 Q . Some parts what? I'm sorry .
13 .A . Some parts of the talk D Colby put in . And
14 th'at 'may have, been in there .
15 Q . Talk to who?
16 Management .
17 What year?
18
19 Did` -- I
20
21 into -- back into the biological work . That's
22 when Dr' . Hayes showed,, ., up .
23 Q . You espoused more in-house biological
24 research in '62 . And then there was no biological
25 research, for whatever reason, in '70 . And then

Vol . 4, Pg . 691
1 when did°Reynolds get'back into biological
research in-house?
It was about '83 ; I guess . There again, I
got. - Dr . Hayes was hired, and he had to acquire
5 a staff, and was . set up to,do all this stuff,
Q- Why was there no in-house biological
research from 1970 to '83?
9 A . Whenever we needed it, we contracted it .
10
11 Industrial :Bio-.Test, in Chicago, and
12 Bio-.Reeearch .'in Montreal, and I don't know where
13 else, if there was anywhere else .
14 Q Did Reynolds have facilities in other
15 countries that did .biological research?
16
17 Q. Did Reynolds contract with university
18 or outside hospital medical personnel to do
19 biological research,'from 170 to '83?
20 A. No . The only ones I know about are the one
21 done in Industrial Bio-Test, and then the one done
22 at Bio-Research -- well, there were several done

~
~
~
23 at .Bio-Research in Montreal . One was a -- ~_A
m
24 Industrial Bio-Test was a tobacco'substitute -- ,P.
cn
im
w
25 well, both of them were tobacco substitute . Then
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 692
1 there was the . .expanded tobacco biological work .
2 Q . Have those reports been published and
3 provided, to your knowledge?
4 A . I don't know . I don't have them .
Q. Industrial .Bio-Test, did they do
and -
10
11 and it include the chemistry of the smoke of the
12 eubstitute .
13 Well, unfortunately, just at that
14 time, Industrial°Bio-Test got into all sorts of
15 trouble with -- I don't know who it was, FDA or
16 somebody, because of something,they had done with
17 some agricultural chemicals they_had_approved or
18 not approved or should°have been'approved or
19 whatever . And most of,. the people that were
20 involved got fired, so it was never .finished .
21 'Q Did you .ever see any published reports
22 of Industrial"Bio-Test?
23 A, Did I ever<see'any?
24 Yes . Ln
0
14
on our work?

Vol . 4, Pg . 693
Yes .
3 0 Do you know .if Industrial Bio-Test did
any testing to determine if any of the compounds
5 in cigarette smoke promoted tumors, caused cancer,
were tumorigenic?
7 N They did a lot of work on ciliastasis .
8 Q . But they didn't publish any reports?
Well, they sent the reports to Reynolds .
10 Q Do you~know where those are?
11 A . They're in the boxes I gave you . Some of
12 them . I think they"confirmed what Lawrence Cook
13 and I had found, that :ciliastats were taken out in
14 the oral cavity .
15 Q Why di`d Reynolds get back into
16 in-house biological research in 1983?
17 Well, here again, it was a management
18 change upper management change in R & D . First
19 one was 1980, then it was 1982/83 . And I -- so
20 D Colby and I - I<did., actually, the
21 presentation - said we ; .should get into
22 bio-behavioral type things about smoking, and why
23 people smoked and how they smoked, and so on and m

~
w
24 so forth . And it was approved . m
25+ VIDEOdRAPHERs M Maistros, we have
WAGA &`SPZNELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 694
five minutes left on the videotape .
2 BY MR . MAISTROSs'
3 Q . Did you ever hear any reasons or
explanations as to why_ ;Reynolds did not have
in-house biological,research from '70 to '83?
Well, not - nobody ;came up and said : Alan,
here=-are the reason.s . But what happened was, if
8 you thought about it,'that -- to set up a
biological system for various -- for a great
10 number of things is`very expensive .' And you could
11 contract it to a,,univergity lab or a commercial
12 lab and they have everything in place ; they have
13 staff, all expert in certain things, whatever
14 you're looking for . And it ended up being much
15 less expensive to do some things like that than to
16 set up a whole system -in your in-house, and
17 maybe use it tw-ice, and then have to go on to
18 something else .
19 So, you know, in the -- for example,
20 as I mentioned, we did,some of the tobacco
21 substitute work by a contract lab . And, by the
22 way, all of that wae confirmed in the NCI study,
23 the puffed tobacco work, and so on .
24 Q ." In 1970, Reynolds had'in-house
251 biological research .already in existence, did they

Vol . 4, Pg . 695
not? So we're not talking about startup costs .'
A . Well, they did -- they weren't set up to
do -- if you did do mouse .skin painting, for
example, you need a tremendous amount of space .
For example, if you have, as I said, cage
controls, solvent controls, positive controls,
test things, you usually do it with 100 or so, 150
mice a piece, and you put six to a cage, and
you're talking an awful lot of space and room, and
10 so on and so forth .
11 Q . In all`the papers that you did in the
12 boxeis-over there, did you ever do a memo to anyone
13 suggesting the reason that there shouldn't be
14 in-house biological testing is the economics?
15 A. No .
16 Q. Did you .ever see a memo, in those six
17 boxes sitting over there, where economics was the
18 reason there was-noìn-house biological research?
19 Well, one of the reasons, for example,
20 that -- here, X had nothing to do with that .
21 That -- the situation aroee in 1970 with the -- Ln

m
~j
22 doing away with the -- if you will, the Mouse
23 House . It actually started in late 1968, when, if
24 you're aware, there was sort of an austerity
25 program ; things weren't going quite as well as

Vol . 4, Pg . 696
1 they could have . We were told, for example, in
2 late 1968 : in your`planning for 1969 and '70, do
not budget any new staff acquisitions or
4 replacement of etaff'who are leaving because of
5 retirement or whatever :
Well that budget was prepared for '69 .
And then, of course, it was again -- started to
prepare,it in late '69 for '70 -- well, several
9 things happened . I had mentioned Penick & Ford in
10 the starch work that was biological work .
11 Well, Reynolds was getting rid of
12 Penick & Ford . The deal with Warner Lambert, the
13 company that was sort of interested in our
14 anti-cholesterol business, fell through . And so,
15 with the austerity thing and the collapse of the
16 Penick & Ford starch business -- now,
17 Penick & Ford also had some interest in our
18 isomerase business, and the agreement ended up
19~ there that Penick & Ford would have the rights to
20' the isomerase patent in the United States and we
21 wouid-have it in the rest of the world . I don't
22 know whether they ever'did license it, but we did .!
23 MR . MA 'ISTROS : We're going to have to :
24 change tapes, okay?
251 THE WITNESS : Okay .

Vol . 4, Pg . 697
VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going off the
record at 3 :16 p .m` . We're off the record .
(Recess taken from 3 :16 p .m . to 3 :37
5 VIDEOGRAPHER : ; This is tape 3 of the
6 videotape d,eposition of„'A] .an Rodgman, Ph .D . We're
going back on_the ;record at 3 :37 p .m .
BY MR . MAISTROS ;`
D, Rodgman, let me see if I can
10 expedite_today and the rest of tomorrow in some
11 fashion . Maybe ao .
12 There are six boxes sitting over
13 here with documents'ìn them . Are you familiar
14 with-those documents?
15 I think so .
16 Q Were all those documents produced by
17 you in'response to document requests in this
181 litigation?
19 A. .' Yes .
20 Q . And all those documents were kept by
21 you in,the regular and .ordinary course of your
22 business at Reynolds? .
23 Well, as I remember, some of them are some
24 things I wrote since I left Reynolds .
25 Q Okay .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 698
MR . BLANCATOa Did you testify
earlier, some are from before?
THE WITNESS : That's right . Some of
them are from my work in -- for example, reprints
of some of my publications, prior to coming to
Reynolds in 1954 . And then there's some work --
publications that I actually published on my Ph .D .
thesis, and I actually .wrote them -- or wrote my
part of it as late, ;as 1959 when I was at Reynolds,
10 with my professor Dr . George F . Wright at the
11 University of Toronto .
12 BY MR . MAISTROSs
13 Q . Is it fair to say that . the vast
14 majority of documents 'in° those six boxes,
15 including the ones that .would be dated between
16 1954 and 1989, are related to your work at
17 Reynolds?
18 Yes .
19 Q. And :that,the vast-majority of such
20 documents were created and kept in the ordinary
21 course of business at Reynolds?
22
23 Q . And are copies of original documents
24 that were . kept 'at Reynol `de?
25 A . Yes .
WAGA .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 699
And you have no reason to believe that
2 any of those documents in there are other than
3 what they appear to be in terms of copies? None
4 are fabricated, in other words?
No . Why would I do that?
6 Q . I wouldn't suggest you would, but
7 silly questions, lawyers have to ask .
You wouldn't object, then, to the
introduction of any of those six documents, (sic)
10 in terms of either being authentic copies or kept
11 in`the ordinary course of business --- six boxes of
12 documents?
13
14 MR . MAISTROS : Can we have a
15 stipulation to that, other than hearsay and
16 relevancy?
17 MR . MCDERMOTT : We're going -- I mean,
18 I haven't looked through every document in those
19 boxes, and so .I can',t stipulate, in gross, that
20 they're all business'records or that they're --
21 that t hey're properly authenticated : But we're
22 not going to be unreasonable . We're going to --
23 we're going to take a sensible and civilized view N

m
IN
24 of the contents of,those boxes . If they're Ln
25 business records, I'm sure we can work out an

Vol . 4, Pg . 700
1 accommodation . If`you"ve got some stuff that you
2 want to examine overnight and you ask me about it
3 or ask Dr . Rodgman about it specifically, that's
fine . I'm not going to stipulate that six boxes,
5 in gross, are :business records, however .
THE WITNESS : For example, along that
7 line, my -- I`believe ; someplace .in that mess, is
a copy of my application for employment at
Reynolds . Now, is that a-~ ;where .does that fit?
10 MR . MAISTROS : Historically
11 interesting, but probably irrelevant .
12 MR . MCDERMOTT : You've also got some
13 calendars that I think .are largely personal and so
14 "fort'h . Again, we're'-not going to be -- we're not
15 going'to be obstructionists, but --
16 MR . MAISTROS s Let me` ask you this,
17 and 'the reason I' m' doing it ° on the record is to
18 : hopefully -- it,was toaexpedite, not to prolong
19 .this . Rather than have me take the witness
20 through all those documents and say, yes, this a
21 copy that -- while I produced at Reynolds . If we
22 can,at least have the agreement, if it's sent to
23 him, :èent by him or he,'s copied on it and it's got ~

r
m
24 something that says it wae Reynolds-affiliated,
25 then we won't be getting a business record

Vol . 4, Pg . 701
objection or hearsay objection .
MR .,'MCDERMOTT : Let me suggest this .
We're going -- we're going to be back tomorrow
morning ;with'this"witness . I m : not involved in
the case directly ; : .I'm not sure what .the history
6 has been between the parties at ;this point . Let's
get'Mr . Belasic'on-the phone at 4 :30, after we let
8 the witness go, and we'can take a look at the
boxes ourselves, and make, maybe, a more sensible
10 determination w,ithout wasting the witness' time or
11 the court reporter's time on this, and we can put
12 stuff on,the record in-the morning . All right?
13 MR . MAISTROS : Okay . Or possibly at
14 4 :30 .
15 BY MR . MAISTR,OSt
16 Q. Now -
17 MR . MCDERHOTT : Possibly 4 :30 .
19 Q . -- you mentioned two studies or two
20 projects you were-involved in at Reynolds,
21 separate and apart from the consulting work you've

Ln
22 done for Womble, right? r
V
23 A.
Ln
24 4 Was one of those in 1994?
25 Well, here again, can remember things in
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 702
1 1954 that I can't remember from yesterday . But
one of them was a book on nitrosamines I wrote .
The .other is a-- there was a gentleman called
Dr . ;;,Dennis .Regan, who . ;wanted a planning meeting --
research planning meeting, and he invited several
retirees to it : . And there was some small amount
of preparation for,the meeting and some things I
wrote for the meeting and presented at the
9 meeting, and I got paid for that, and so on and so
10 forth . So those are the two things --
11 When was that latter meeting?
12 Well, both'.of them have-to have been after
13 I guess . Because I had that five-year
14 restriction on being able to do work for Reynolds
15 until the five years up was after my'retirement .
16 So -'- I mean, the information -- the contracts
17 have been provided, and how much I was paid, and
18 all this -- and the books are in there .
19 Q . So all the results of those two
20 projects are in .those six boxes?
21 Someplace, yeah .
22 0 •You were reviewing Dr . Townsend's
23 trial testimony from the Florida case earlier ; do
24 you remember that? .
25 A . Yeah .

Vol . 4, Pg . 703
Was there anything in there that -- as
2 you .were reviewing it, that you agreed with or
disagreed with, that you remember as you sit here
today?
5 Well, I agreed with a lot of what he said .
6 Q. Was there anything that you can recall
that you disagreed with?
Not really . I didn't read it that closely,
9 Mr . ;Maistros . I just want'ed to see how -- I had
10 seen him on television . And, of course, I hired
11 Dr . Townaend . And -- he's a very brilliant young
12 knew ;he would do .a good job, anyway .
13 You were not aware he was going to
14 te .stity in that case, before he did so?
15 I knew he wae`getting ready for something,
16 but I didn't know which one it was until, all of a
17 sudden, I looked at the television and there he
is, being asked questions .
In '54 to 165 you've already testified
what you were primarily involved in . Were there
other projects you were working on, that you
22 haven't testified .about, in that time period?
23 Well, as I<say, we were doing the smoke
24 composition -- if I may, let me run through .
25 Polycyclic,,-- discounting the phenol
WAGA & SPINELhI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4 , Pg . 704
synthesis thing, it was polycyclic work ; we did
some work on the aza=arenes ; which are nitrogen
compounds that are structurally similar to the
polycyclic hydrocarbons ; then we did the phenol
work ; we did the ciliastat work ; and we started to
do some work on nitroeamines in the '63/'64 era .
And then -- and, here, I've forgotten
8 the date, we had a shift in management .
Mr . Hoover retired ;`Dr . Senkus became director of
10 ~research ; and a new man, the vice president of
11 R& D, Dr . Willard Bright became vice president of
12 R& D . And he had a bit different attitude about
13 what we should be doing and what we shouldn't be
14 doing . He was very interested in acquisitions,
15 and he was the one that triggered the
16 Penick & Ford thing and the Warner Lambert thing .
17 And he also got :us involved in a tobacco
18 substitute study'for a material called Sutton
19
20 4 -Sutton?
21 A .' Sutton, S-t7-T-.T-O-N .
22 So the tobacco work -- or tobacco
23 smoke work and our tobacco composition studies
24 were, sort of dropped in favor of some of the new
25 things he wanted done . And for the next several

Vol . 4, Pg . 705
ye'ars, my group, which I wasn't familiar with, you
know, studied, not only the Button .smoking
3 material, but,a smoking material manufactured by
Celanese, and that's called Cytrel, C-Y-T-R-E-L,
5 and emoking materiai manufactured in England
called_New Smoking Material, by Imperial Chemical
and Imperial Tobacco Company .'
8 And we looked at these, and we had
9 problems with all of them . And over the next --
10 between 1965 and maybe 1970, early '70's, a young
11 man called Jack'White,•developed a smoking tobacco
12 substitute that was better than any one we could
13 buy or license or whatever . And we did all the
14 smoke work on it and so on, the animal work .
15 And we never used it, because there
16 were thirteen brands introduced in the United
17 Kingdom with NSM 3mperial smoking material and the
18 Cytrel, and within nine months every one of them
19 hadn't sold enough to make a penny . So we never
20 did`market and put it in our cigarettes .
21 R. Do you k~ow°if ff there was nicotine in Ln

~
V
22 those materials? ~.A
m.
~
23 Not per se, no . And, of course, nobody ever Ln
N
J
24 marketed a cigarette made of 100 percent smoking
251 material .' It was always blended with 80 percent

Vol . 4, Pg . 706
1 tobacco or 70 percent tobacco or 90 percent
tobacco .
3 Q . When you say "not per se," you mean
4 what nicotine there was, was from the natural .
5 tobacco that appeared in the product?
A. .Right . These things are all cellulose
derivatives, mixed with a bunch of inorganic clays
and .whatnot, or salt .
Q. Was the .primary interest of your
10 supervisor the fact that it would be a tobacco
11 substitute and reducee the cost of the product, or
12 it .would reduce the biological activity of the
13 product?
14 A . Well, actually'the cost of most of the
15 tobacco substitutes, the -- except for the one we
16 developed in-house, the cost of the'three we could
17 have bought cost more than the tobacco .
18 Q . So what was the primary goal, then, of
19 developing
20 Well the primary goal was to -- would this be
21 anàdditional_way that -- to add to the eight
22 technologies that would be acceptable in the
23 generation of a less hazardous cigarette . And,
24 well, the Cytrel, for example, was tested in the
25 NCI study that ran from '68 to '78 and, despite

Vol . 4, Pg . 707
I
their claims,'it was-worse than tobacco, in terms
of producing tumors on mice and so on .
Q. Has anyone when you say that there
4 were thirteen brands .that -
They were introduced in England .
Commercially?
Commercially .
And how "long were they .on the market?
Oh, someòf them were out there -- most of
10 them were gone within nine months . I happened to
11 when --
12 nine-month, ten month after they had been first
13 introduced, and I finally found a,pack ; but I had
14 to go into eleven-tobacco~stores in London to find
15 a pack . And the'fel,low said : Here, take it . He
16 didn't even :~harge me ., He'said : It's the last
`17 one-I've got, and it's~been sitting here for five
18 months .
19 Q . And how long did you work on a
20 potential tobacco substitute?
21 Well, I said, we worked on the Sutton one, we
22 worked on the° .NSM, we worked on the Cytrel .
23 didn t do an awful lot ;of work on the NSM ; most of
24 that work was some really fundamental .smoke work,
25 tar and nicotine - _well, not nicotine . Tar,
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 708
carbon monoxide and .so on .
2 That one we did quite a bit of work on
panel evaluation' . That was one of the problems
with all those three,that -- whether`they were
alone-or mixed with tobacco at various levels, the
parieaists just didn't cotton to them, smoking a
cigarette, per se . But`t he,other thing that they
8 didn't like was, if somebody was in the room, side
9 stream smoke was very obnoxious, in terms of an
10 .of flodor, that it smelt ,like, 'burning paper .
11 Nobody liked to have .that .
12 Now, the one we developed in-house,
13 and we panel-tested it,'and the people didn't
14 know, of course, that it was ours . It didn't have
15 a taete'problem, and it did all the things that we
16 had hoped it would do . And soìt would have been
17 a W y to' make money .. And of' course we had it
18 patented . And I' :mFaaure, if you look at the
19 patents, you'll see .what it is ; it's a puffed
20 _ so
21 0 Did :'you'personally believe that these
22 potential tobacco eubet'itutes :would result in a
23 safer cigarette?
24 ~Well, we were hoping, that when we looked at
251 the!Sutton material and the Cytrel material, that

Vol . 4, Pg . 709
it_ would be another way to do things that were in
the definition that had been laid out in the '60s
by W.ynder, Hoffmann, Bock and all that bunch .
Q . But you personally didn't believe, in
your heart of hearts, that it mattered anyway, did
you?
Well, what Is was looking for is, if that's
f course,
10 t
11 sales-weighted average, we kept dropping it,
12 the industry kept dropping that
13 in -- the requfrement that Dr . Wynder and others
14 had said : Drop it 40 percent and the effect will
15 go :"_away . Well we dropped it 40 and then they said
16 not'enough . We dropped it another 40 ; not enough .
17 You, know, where do you stop?
18 Q . Are you talking about the FTC testing
19 method or -
20 Right .
21 Q. When`you say that the -- you kept
22 dropping the tar content, that's -- and you've L,

~
;_j
23 testified about that on a couple occasions today . m
24 You!re talking about the FTC testing method?
25 Right .

Vol . 4, Pg . 710
1 Q . Had you done, in fact, research that
2 would indicate that the FTC testing method was ann
inaccurate method to test tar content of
c,igarettes?
MR . MCDERMOTTs Object .t o the form of
THE WiTNESS : "it -- the way it's done,
what you get is,what you get .
BY MR . MAISTROSs
10 But nobody smokes that way .
11 A. .Nobody smokes that way . We told them that in
12
13 They don't
14 And, now,
15 everybody's complaining that the FTC doesn't do -
16 the people don't smoke the way the machine smokes,
17 eo, ;therefore, there's something wrong with it .
18 And we had told ;them that in 1963, '64, '65 . And
19 they came out in`1966 and said : You will do the
20 analysis this way, period . And that was that .
21 Q Has there ever been any discussion at
22 Reynolds about whether or not Reynolds has an
23 .obligation .to advise the_public on its cigarettes,
24 or otherwiae, that the FTC yields published on the
25 ciga.rettes, don't mean a .whole lot?
WAGA & SPINELLI' (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4 g . 711
MR . BLANCATO : Object to the form .
the question .
THE WITNESS :, You know, what
management wants to`do about that is their
business . You know, you usually don't tell the
FTC too much .
8 BY MR . MAISTROSs
Q . Did yo'u ever tell management that
10 perhaps RJR should consider"publishing what it
11 believed to be more realistic tar and nicotine
12 yield numbers on its cigarettes?
13 A . Well --
14 MR . MCDERMOTT : Object to the .form of
15 the :question . No foundation . .
16 THE`WITNESS : The number that .you get
17 is all right, except people don't smoke that way .
18 Now, there may be one person in ten that smokes
19 exactly the same as the smoking machine . But, you
20 know, if you were to,smoke a cigarette in Alaska
21 at 20 below zero
22 BY MR .`MAISTROS :
23 Q, I would hope you would be doing
24 e'omething other than -
25 A .' -- and compared it to smoking one at Key West
WAGA .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 712
at 90 degrees and 100 percent humidity, that's
2 going to be entirely different than smoking a
3 cigarette at the FTC parameters .
And the other thing, that if you, say,
have three cigarettes, just take an example, at
20 milligrams delivery of tar, depending how those
cigarettes`were made,j those tars could be entirely
different . And`they know that ; it's all in the
NCI'report of -- on the less hazardous cigarettes .
10 Q . Again, though -- and you can say you
11 disagree if it's the case with the premise of my
12 question . But did you ever suggest to anyone at
13 RJR that the results that you determined at age --
14 not you, but that RJR determined, the tar and
15 nicotine content of cigarettes and how it differed
16 from the FTC, that those results should be
17 published?
18 Well, which smoker would you pick?
19 Q . Well, didn't you do tests that
20 indicated that the average smoker took in more tar
21 and nicotine than would be established by the FTC
22 testing method?
23 A . I don't -- I don't know about -- that might
24 have been done after'I left . I don't know .
25 Q . Did you''view or did you ever express

Vol . 4, g . 713
the-opinion, while-you were at RJR, that the
2 FTC-published reductions in tar and nicotine
3 indicated that RJR was producing a safer
4 cigarette?
Well, the FTC never .said that .
Q Is the fact that a cigarette is lower
9 in tar and nicotine indicative that it's a safer
10 ciga,rette,, An your''opinion?
11 Well, that's one part of the -- well, the
12 nicotine was :never mentioned in the original
13 definition . But that is one part of the overall
14 definition that,came oLtt .in the late '59 --
15 '50s/early '60s . 0ne of the parts is that the tar
16 is re'duced, the tumorigenicity -- specific
17 tumorigenicity of the,tar'is reduced and the level
18 of certain. components relative to tar are reduced .
19 Q . Do you concur in the assessment that,
20 if you have lower tars, you're going to have a
21 safer cigarette?
cn
22 ; I don't know . You know, you'd have to say :
J
F-A
231 What kind of tar? And .there again -- for example m

Sch
Ln
24 if,,you looked at the F-- the NCI work, which nJ
M
25 involves a hundred and-something experimental
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 714
cigarettes, you would make your choice -- for
2 example, you could have a 20-milligram cigarette,
take one of their-samples -- and here I'm just
giving you an example, and I'm sure the numbers
5 aren't going to be the same as in those four
reports .
But .you could take a 20-milligram
8 cigarette that had -- and let's just pick a
figure, ten nanograms of benzpyrene per cigarette .
10 Now,-if you had any health concerns, would you
11 pick that cigarette,_20 versus 10, versus another
12 c.igarette that, say, had 15 milligrams of tar but
13 20 .mi1 -- 20 nanograms of benzpyrene? Which would
14 you pick? Would you ;pick the -- it depends on
15 whether you're concerned about tar per se or the
16 polycyclics per se .
17 But the number you get ,from the FTC
18 does not tell you what the'composition of that tar
19 And when we tried to tell the FTC that in the
20 mid '60s, they'said all you're trying to do i
21 make your produCt tsound good . And that's the lastj

Ln
- ~
22 we heard of it until'people, in the last five or ~
_ Im
23 six years,, have started to say : Well, you know, !Ln
N
~
24 there's a problem here . And actually, the problem
25 came up in 1980, with the Berkley cigarette --
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 715
Barclay cigarette .
Q What' prob],em?
A . Well, the .Barclay cigarette, when you smoked
4 it on the -- in the FTC method, you got a certain
tar yield . But when ;the smoker smoked it, and was
forced to smoke exactly the same as'the smoking
machine'- that can be done by appropriate
mechanics - because of the way the lips press down
on the filter tip, which had some grooves in it,
10 theJsmoker was`taking in twice as much'as the FTC
11 method :ehowed on the Phipps & Bird smoking
12 machine'. And
13 the FTC .'
14
15 things you'were doing between 1954,and '65 .
16 Well, as'I say, in -- well, we got to the
17 substitute thing, which actually ran from the late
18 '64s -- .,- I guess '65 Is when we got into the
19 substitutes .
20 There was a time there, and I'm sure,
21 if you look at some of the reports I wrote, I know
22 there was a question- :that came up in the - - f rom
23 M O'Fallon about publishing/not publishing
24 things we had done . Well, I think, at one time,
25 we ."'looked to perhaps fifteen different kinds of
WAGA `& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 716
filters that had been proposed for their effect on
certain smoke components . And every one did not
perform like the patent said it would .
4 Well, there's a report on each one of
those, or maybe some that are combined, the
two-in-one reports, but how can you publish
something that shows -- ends up being a failure?
_ The,`journal won't take it .
Then if you look, for example -- I
10 went to a lot of meetings in conjunction with my
11 research work and in connection with my providing
12 infbrmation to the law department . I guess, over
13 the_years, I went to .a dozen AACR meetings, and
14 half a dozen American Cancer Society meetings, the
15 Heart Association meetings and so on . And these
16 are reports to management of what things I had
17 picked up there,•what people had said, and so on
18 and"so forth . Well, you don't publish those .
19 So when,you back off on the, oh, I
20 don't know, hundred or so reports I wrote, you can
21 find'out, about half of them wouldn't be Ln

~
1 1-4
22 publishable anyway .` And the ones we did -- many
23 of the ones .we did publish, of course, are in the
24 literature or presented at meetings .
251 Q. Do you recall any titles, off the top

Vol . 4, Pg . 717
your head, that -
published, that indicated that there was health
3 hazards 're,lated to smoking?
4 No, I didn' t .
Q . Are there any, out of the six boxes
over there, published reports that you authored,
that indicate health ;consequences re,lated to
smok'ing?,
Not in so many words . Now, we did publish
10 some components in smoke that subsequently were
11 shoivn to have a problem .
12 Q . I'm specifically talking about papers,
13 where the topic or theme or conclusion was that
14 there was a health_risk related to amoking . Do
15 you recall publishing any such papers?'
16 No . No " I did not .
17 Q . You reviewed a lot of papers, did you
18 not,-that reported links between smoking and
19
20 .
21
22
23
24
25 lot of the chemical stuff .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 71 8
Q . Any>of the -- specifically there was
research, was therenot, biological testing, that
established a purported link between cigarette
smoke and its compoundsor components and advers e
health consequences .
literature ?
Yeah . Bu t I was in the chemistrybusiness .
Now, as I say, the people in the bio bunch, they
looked at ciliastasia, and so on . At one time --
10 I mentionedthe work Lawrence Cook and I had don e
11 about the ciliastasis and finding it -- most of i t
12 wasabsorbed in the mouth, the ciliastats . Now ,
13 guess that's biological, because we did it with
14 people .
15 Q . What chemical research did you try to
16 duplicate ?
17 A . . Well, we weren't duplicating any ; we were th e
18 first to find out that the ciliastats were
19 absorbed in the mouth .
20 Q . Separate'and apart, from the
21 .ciliastats,, did you attempt to duplicate any of
22 the chemical studiesthat were done and then
23 publi.shed in the literature, that showed a link
24 between cigarette smoking or the compounds i n
251 cigarette smoke and adverse health consequences ?
WAGA &SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 719
the question .
THE WITNESS : Well, it was a long
question . But,_for example, there were claims of
e'o,-much volatile nitrosamines or tobacco specific
nitrosamines in cigarette smoke .- We looked at it,
and the work published_in the collection procedure
8 0 avoid-artifactual formation of
nitrosamines during the analysis, used ascorbic
10 the collection system, which
11 was supposed to :prevent artifactual .formation of
12 the`nitrosamines ; and which it did .
13 ° Well, the ;people at Reynolds -- we got
14 wondering about some of the values they were
15 getting for the nitrosamines, so they looked at
16 it . And in the .collection of cigarette smoke you
17 hav.e a epecial kind of filter that the smoke
18 impinges on and :is collected, 99 .9 .percent . And
19 the people at Reynolds decided to put ascorbic
20 acid on the pad . Well, when they did that -- the
21 levels of nitrosamines reported by everybody else,
22 prior to that, was about 25, 30 percent less,
23 depending on which one,you were looking at . And
24 w
what was happening, you were preventing the 1~
25 artifactual formation right on the~pad before you

I

Vol . 4, Pg . 720
ever took it,to the ;analysis . And that's been
2 confirmed in a lot of laborat-ories .
3 o, there's a great deal made of how
much the nitrosamines are in smoke, and -- but,
you know, is it relevant when most of the numbers
6 in the literature, except the ones published since
thatàrticle by=Rey,nolds,,are wrong ; they're not
8' only wrong for cigarette smoke, they're wrong for
9 bac:on and anything .else you see with nitrosamines .
10 If it .would make you feel any better, your bacon
11 has about 30 percent less than what everybody has
12 been telling you .
13 Q . What were your official titles between
14 154 and ' .65?
15 I was a senior research chemist from 1954
. 16 until 1965 . When Dr Bright came -- well, let me
17 back up a littI le . .
18 Mr . Hoover had a peculiar philosophy .
19 There was director of_research, there were the
20 -managers, and ;there . ;were-the troops . The troops
21 were divided into eenior research chemists, or
22 biologists or`b,io-chemists, research chemists, ~
2 asbociate research chemists, .technicians . There

Ln
24 was .no administrative people below manager, ~
251 supervi.sors .

Vol . 4, Pg . 721
Dr :'Bright came, and he didn't like
that . Well, also, :another thing, the place was
.getting larger, .more : ;p.eople . And he set up a
system where you had a manager, section head, a
group leader', -and then the :-troops . And when he
came, I was made a sect-ion head in charge of the
What year?
A . 1965, 1 guess, is when he came . He did it
10 soon after he came :
11 Q . And how long were you section head?
12 . Well, in 19 --'I got to get this straight .
13 the spring of 1973, my
14 boss, who was, at that time, the manager of the
151 chemical research, was Dr . Anders Laurene . He was
16 sent off to take a,management course at the
17 University of North Carolina over at Chapel Hill
18 for six months . And then`he was assigned to do an
19 orientation through the -- the development
20 department . And while he was gone, .I was acting
21 manager of the chemical research division .
22 When`he came back, I went back to
23 being section head . And then, the next spring and
24 75,
251 analytical divieion, which, at the time, I thought

Vol . 4, Pg . 722
1 was an odd choice, not knowing that they already
had plans . And then, the spring of '76, I was
3 made :director of research .
Q : Director` of research for all of
Reynolds?
6 Tobacco .
And then, in 1980, when we had the
massive organization -- reorganization, our R & D
9 was split into six divisions, instead of just
10 being research and development . I got the task of
11 being director of-fundamental research .
12 Q . As opposed to what other type of
13 research?
14 . Well, there was fundamental research
15 director, applied research director, analytical
16 research director, process engineering,
17 administration -- what was t he other one? There
18 were six•
19 Q . New products?
20 Oh, yeah .. It wasn't new products, it was
21 products . .Just products . So you had fundamental,
22 applied, and products .
23 0 And you were in charge of which one?
24 A. Fundamental .
25 Q Unt il when?

Vol . 4, Pg . 723
Until I retired .
2 Q o are weùsing the '87 date, then?
3 Right .
Q . From '80 to '87, was there one group
that looked at health aspects, as opposed to
6 another group?
Well, in '83, sometime in there was when we
got Dr . Hayes on board, and I set up the whole
biobehavioral/biological system there . So from
10 then till, I guess, now, that's what they're
11 doing .
12 Q. '83 till now, ;biobehavioral/biological
13 looking at health issues?
14 assume they're related, to some -- I don't
15 knOw`what their projecte are, actually .
16 Q What division under research was
17 biobehavioral/biological?' I mean, was that under
18 one of these six research groups?
19 . No . Actually, when they formed the
20 biobehavioral division, which was in '82, some
21 it was actually put in fundamental ; I had John

Ln
22 Reynolds and John Robinson and those people ~
~
N
23 wo .rking` for me .' Then, when Wally Hayes came, they ', m
24 moved it from fundamental into the more

Ln
25 biologically-oriented part .

Vol . 4, Pg . 724
Q,. During .this period of time, were you
familiar with the creation of key issues?
3 MR . MCD.ERMOTTs Object to the form of
thel .queetion .
BY MR . MAYSTROSs
Do you know what a key issue is?
What's an RJR key issue?
If they sell cigarettes .
10 s that one of the key issues?
11 A . ' I've -- I was trying to think- that I' had seen
12 something on that, but I really can't spell it out
13 in .the language I think you're looking for .
14 Q . - Did you ever participate in a project
15 or .* process whereby key issues were identified by
16 RJR~
17
18 Some of the reports in those six boxes
19 over there,have "key issues" written on them and
20 the langua,ge "varies, '' and we' re going
21 to-get into them tomorrow . But I want to ask you,
22 generally, 'if you- know . :how that came about, the
23 development of the key issue concept .
241 May I ask a question?
25 Q Sure .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4 g . 725
A . Is this a document where the issues are what
happens in the world and how Reynolds would
respond?
Q . Yes, thatts some of them .
Okay . Well, that was -- they started, I
guess, in the early '70s, as I remember . And
everybody pitched in and gave suggestions of, you
know, what would happen -- what would Reynolds do
if something happened in another tobacco company,
10 or happened in North America, or happened in the
11 world, and so on and'so forth . How would we
12 respond? And for some ;years Dr . Teague put --
13 assembled everything and put them together, and
14 they`were distributed to upper management, to get
15 • their .views . And -
16 Q . You did not participate in that
17 process?
18 A . _ Oh, I-~ I chipped in with some suggestions
19 here .and there . . And then, .of course, when
20 Dr .'Teague left R& D, I ended up, I think, doing
21 the last one or two, assembling them myself . If
22 that's the paper you're talking about .
23 Q . For example, and we'll get into
24 specific
. ones tomorrow, but there's -- there's
25 specific research projects that are set up, and

Vol . 4, g . 726
1 then there's a goal or a key issue identified as
2 the basis for that project that it relates to .
And there's been some testimony in the past that
4 every research project had to have a key issue
assigned to it . Are you familiar with that
6 concept at all?
7 I guess I never thought about it in that
8 terms, but it sounds'logical . As I remember, some
things in those key issue things were never done .
10 Q. Were you -- during the period of time
11 that you were at Reynolds, were you ever demoted?
12
13 Q Were you ever written up for any
14 incidents that you view as an infraction or a
15 demotion?
16 No . I was fired .
17 Q . ; By Reynolds?
18 By Mr . Hoover .
19 Q . What year was that?
201 Oh, about 1963 .
211 Q How long were you fired?

m
22 Fifteen mihutes .
23 0 What was that over?
24 There had been an unpleasant incident in the
251 research department that we usually don't like to

Vol . 4, Pg . 727
talk about . And when Mr . Hoover went to the
weekly meeting over at the head office, main
office, somebody said : Hey, what about so-and-so?
And he was furious .
And he came back and called me into
his office, and I didn't know what he was talking
7 You
contact with anybody on the board because of your
contact with,Mr : Ramm . Get your stuff out of

.
10 here .
11 Q You disclosed something that happened
12 in re .eearch that he thought .
13 I didn't .
14 e thought you .dieclosu
15 thought .I did . . So I asked him, I said :
16 Why don't you phone Mr . Ramm and ask him the last
17 time I talked to him, and I can tell you exactly
18 when it was .
19 Q . What did he think you disclosed?

I
20 Well, as Z say, it was this unpleasant
21
22 R Well,,what was the unpleasant
23 incident?
24 . Well, somebody was supposed to have done some
251 analysis and just wrote down numbers .

Vol . 4, Pg . 728
Q. On .what`research project?
Well, it wasn't . It was -- when you buy
tobacco, we used to get a sample of all the
pallets of tobacco and_,analyze .them for tar -- for
nicotine and sugar . So that, if :nicotine was
6 high, we could remove it and if -- so we could do
the .blending . And'this fellow was -- rather than
run them, he just wrote down numbers, and it
happened to be one set of tobacco was from an area
10 in the south here where it had been very hot, very
11 little rain . And when that happens, the tobacco,
12 ina_tead of being `two 'and' a half percent nicotine
13 will - it may jump'to six .
14 And the-person who had turned in the
15 samples to .him knew that we had a whole bunch of
16 samples, five or six or eight, I forget the
17 number, that probably were going to be around four
18 or five, and they had to be cataloged for nicotine
19 removal . And when he got the usual numbers, two,
20 two and a half percent, he put in some -- we have
21 -to have -- we happened to have some low
22 experimental tobaccos from NC State and you put in
23 some more high, and they all came back 2 .2, 2 .3 .
24 Of course he was fired, right then and there,
25 but -- you don't get that very often .

Vol . 4, Pg . 729
i
1 And so Mr . Hoover phoned Mr . Ramm, and
M . Ramm confirmed`the :exact time I had spoken to
3 him, which had been three months before, and said :
A1l-right forget about"leaving .
{~ . The -- who was the gentleman that was
6 tired?
Oh, he was a technician . I've forgotten his
name .
Q . Now, we''11_ ;get into this tomorrow, I'm
10 certain, but you mentioned that, if the nicotine
11 is too high, you`have to remove it . Are you
12 familiar with that`process?
13 A . Yes .
14 Q . How's the nicotine,removed?
i5 Exposure to steam and ammonia . And you can
16 take it down to any value you want .
17 Q .` By adjusting the amount or the timing
18 f the steam and'ammonia?
19 Well, it's the way it rolls through the
20 conveyor belt, timing on the conveyor belt --
21 Q . How long,has RJR treated its tobacco
22 with` "ateam and" ammonia?
23 I think the first report on it is someplace
24 around 1958 .
25 Q . Were they still doing that when you

Vol . 4, Pg . 730
le'ft in ' 87?
assume so, if they -- if you had high
nicotine tobacco from a hot, dry summer or
something .
Q . The only occasion that RJR would treat
nic -- or tobacco with 'steam .and'ammonia was when
they had high nicotine•content?,
A . Well, only that'part of the`tobacco . Now,
they'did have a reconstituted tobacco sheet they
10 treated with ammonia .
11 Q . That's a different process though,
12 correct?
13 A . Right .' It also reduces the nicotine .
14 Q . The process of applying steam and
15 ammonia to the tobacco to reduce the nicotine, you
6 said you could get the nicotine to 'whatever level
17 you wanted . -Within_what degree of error?
18 A . I really =- I'm -- you know,•I never was
19 involved in the engineering of, that . But the
20 objeot was that`, if, you'had -- here again, you
21 have to have some understanding .of how you blend
22 tobaccos . You .don't go out and buy .a year's
23 tobacco . And of cou,r.se it's,always aged for -- in
24 storage` :sheds for maybe 12 months to two years, to
251 let all' .the things go on that goes on when tobacco
WAGA & :: SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 731
a ged . You .don't take all that tobacco two
years .later, say, .and use it .
What you do is you combine tobaccos
from three .consecutive years and you juggle it so
that the nicotine change is a minimum . And if you
have -- well, just say you have flue-cured tobacco
from Georgia that's two and a half percent
nicotine, and flue-cured tobacco from someplace in
North Carolina where it's five, you remove the
10 nicotine f rom the five percent nicotine tobacco
11 and bring it down to the two and a half, or a
12 little less, depending on whether you, over the
13 years, want t o keep reducing it . Because,
14 usually, what happens is, as things go by, the
15 ni`cotine sort of para11e1s .the tar .
16 But,the'-- I've been interested in
17 some of the things I've heard about nicotine on
18 the news and so on . And what some people should
19 find'out is that, when you bring tobacco in from
20 the market, the first thing you do is stem it .
21 And when you stem 'it, you keep it at -- keep it
22 moist so it doesn't shatter . And when it goes
23 down the conveyor belt, the stems go in one
24 direction, the cut lamina go in the other . But if
25 you measure the nicotine from the time you put it

Vol . 4, Pg . 732
on',that conveyor belt to the time it comes off the
2 other end, you've lost two percent of your
3 nicotine .
Then when you store it and age it for
5 12 monthe, .two years, you've got to bring it out .
6 And to take it out of the containers so it doesn't
7 fragment, you again moisten it, warm it, run it
8 through the conveyor belt for a certain period of
9 time, and you lose another couple of percent
10 nicotine -- a percent of the percent you've got
11 there .
12 So when you puff tobacco -- all you
13 got to do is look at the'NCI study where they used
14 our puffed tobacco, Philip Morrie' puffed tobacco,
15 North Carolina State . Every state where puffed
16 tobacco was used, the nicotine is down 40 percent .
17 So when you take tobacco that has been
18 losing nicotine because of the way you process it,
19 then you put in a tobacco that's been expanded and
20 has lost nicotine, the nicotine in that cigarette j Ln

.
~
21 is going to be less'than the tobaccos that you ;~
22 bought to put in it . Ln
23 And I can -- might tell you one other
24 thing, if you're interested . Is that, if Reynolds
25 or anybody else want to increase the nicotine to

Vol . 4, g . 733
the'consumer, there are two ways to do it . And
they could make afortune .
Q . How° is that?
Don't put cellophane around the pack .
Because, as a cigarette dries out, the nicotine in
the smoke increases . The only reason the
cellophane'or the protective material around the
pack is to ;prevent moisture loss . As the moisture
goes'down, the nicotine in the smoke goes up .
10 Now, why would you --
11 Q . What's the second way?
12 Is to leave out half the humectants . If you
13 drop the humectants`from, say, five percent to two
14 and a half percent, the nicotine in smoke will go
15 up . And glycerine is expensive . Propylene glycol
16 is expensive .
17 Q . Why .is Reynolds, then, concerned in '(n

_
.i
18 the initial process -- I assume youfre talking im
i
19 about the initial process whereby they have to ~
L"
20 remove nicotine of high nicotine yield tobacco?
21 Well, the object is to keep the product, from
22 year to year, from-quarter to quarter, fairly
23 uniform so the consumer does not all of a sudden
24 see a big'change . Now, you might say : Well, they
25 could .increase it gradually . But all .you have to

Vol . 4, Pg . 734
is look at the sales-weighted average data and
it's obvious that from -- well, from 1954 to the
current time, the nicotine has been,dropping
gradually in every` :cigarette marketed in this
5 country .
6 Q . Is there a process you're familiar
with that Reynolds employs when the-nicotine
8 content is too low in .the tobacco?
can't think-of one, but T ; ;could think
10 of a .solution .to it .
11 What's that?
12 s mix low'tobacco -- low nicotine tobacco
13 with one that's'slightly above average, and
14 average it .out . . I don't know whether they do
15 that .
16 Q •-
17 manufacturing process?
18
19
20
21 Weren't you,identified as an expert ir
22 the .manufacturing process in the Texas case? L,

t,,
23
24 You weren't?
25

Vol . 4, Pg . 735
1 Did you ever read what your expert
designation was,in that case?
Yeah . I don't believe I am .
4 t2 . You're. not an expert in,the production
process?
Q . Do you know what methods, if any, have
8 been employed'by Reynolds to attempt to control
9 the nicotine level _in the tobacco, other than the
10 one you've testified to about the steam and
11 ammonia,
12 here again ;,I come'back to the eight
13 significant technologies . Foz .example, you can
14 control the nicotine .-in the smoke by controlling
15 the blend . You can control the nicotine in the
16 smoke by controlling'the efficiency of the filter,
17 which removes the total particulate matter which
18 contains the nicotine .
19 You can control it by increasing or
20 juggling the amount of reconstituted tobacco which
21 is ).ow in nicotine . The more you put in, the

Lq
H
22 lower your nicotine . You can reduce it by the _j
r
23 degree of air .dilution you use, by perforated
24 filters or by porous cigarette paper .
25 Q . Doesn't Reynolds -- doesn't Reynolds,

Vol . 4, Pg . 736
1 at the beginning of the process, have a specific
2 nicotine content that it's striving to achieve at
the end of the process for every particular type
4 of cigarette they're selling?
I don't really know that .
0 I mean, I look in the supermarket and
7 see all these different brands of cigarettes,
from Reynolds, for example, and they .all have
different t-ar and nicotine yields . I assume
10 that"s not by accident-that they end up that way
11 in those particular packages .
12 would imagine :that the big thing they try
13 to do ie'control the tar, and ;the nicotine falls
14 where it may .
15 You know, talking about nicotine
16 well, maybe I won't say that .
17 Q ao'ahead . This is the end of the day ;
18 it~'-s~'your opportunity to say --
19 Do you ever wonder why the FTC equation is as
20
21 Why?
22 Wet TPM,equals tar, plus water, plus
23 nicotine?
24 MS . BRACHTL : Would you repeat that?
25 I couldn't hear you back here .
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4 g . 737
THE WITNESS : The FTC equation for
calculating tar is wet TPM equals tar, plus water,
plus nicotine . In other words, tar is water-free,
nicotine-free, wet TPM . And the reason it's that
wa-y is 'cause, if you read the 1964 Surgeon
aene-raY's report, nicotine essentially is given a
clean .bill of health . So the two ingredients in
wet,TPM, that was obvious to everybody at that
tinie had no concern :with health, was wa,ter and
10 .nicotine : And that equation is still the same to
11 this day .
12 MR . MAISTROS : Okay . We're going to
13 b.reak .until tomorrow morning . Nine o'clock?
14 MR .-MCDERMOTT : Yeah .
15 VIDEOaRAPHER : We're_going off the
16 record at 4 :30-p .m .
17 (Deposition adjourned at 4 :30 p .m .)
18
19
20
Ln
21
~
22
23
24
25
(201) 992-4111
Vol . 4, Pg . 738
I
1 U~T RAT
2 Alan Rodgman, Ph .D ., do hereby
3 certify that I have'read the foregoing transcript
of my testimony, taken on Monday, August 4, 1997,
and have signed it subject to the following
changes :
PAGE' LINE CORRECTION
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
211 DATE :'
22 Sworn and subscribed to before me on this
23 d a y o f -------~------------
24 NOTARY PUBLIC ------------------------------ m
25
WAGA & SPINELLI - (201) 992-4111

Vol . 4, Pg . 739
1 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

COUNTY OF YADKIN
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
I, Linda N . Russell, a'Notary Public in and
5 for the State of North Carolina, do hereby certify
6 that-there came before me on Monday, August 4, 1997,
7 the person hereinbefore named, who was by me duly
sworn to testify to the truth and nothing but the
9 truth of his knowledge .concerning the matters in
10 controversy in this cause ; that the witness was
11 thereupon examined under,oath, the examination
12 reduced to typewriting under my direction, and the
13 deposition is a true record of the testimony given
14 by the witness .
15 I further certify that I am neither
16 attorney or counsel for, nor related to or employed
17 by, any attorney or counsel employed by the parties
18 hereto or financially interested in the action .

~
~
19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my ~
L_ a E~~ "a ""~F „"4 ~ I 1 1- hi ..+

a
2V LlanGiaanCx ZlLL17Ce~d 'illy ~LLl~:iai aava.a+.~.vL i vv~+, .+. .+tha . ii~
21 12th day of August .1997 .
22
23 North t~tpia i VWkin

UNDA N. RUSSEL ~
-N~wPiei;,, ~'Li da N . Russ 11, Notary Public
24 #ly Oommfssbri EzDiros a-2S•qt„~,~,, , j Commission Expires 8/25/97
25

LAWYER'S NOTES
Pwo6 LINB
I*
LAWYER'S NOTES
LIN6
0
LAWYER'S NOTES
Pwoe LIN6
O
LAWYER'S, NOTES
PAGE LIN6
0
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Civil Action No . 96CV-5903
STEVEN R . ARCH, WILLIAM BARNES, )

CIARAN McNALLY, CATHERINE POTTS, )
NORMA RODWELLER, BARBARA SALZMAN, ) CERTIFIED COPY
EDWARD J . SLIVAK and JOHN TEAGLE, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
Deposition of :
)
vs . ) Alan Rodgman,
) Ph .D .
THE AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY, )
INC ., et al ., ) Volume 5,
) Pages 740 - 1024
Defendants . )
)
----------------------------------)
(Caption continues . . .)
CONFIDENTIAL
TRANSCRIPT of testimony as taken by and
before LINDA RUSSELL, a Certified Shorthand
Reporter and Notary Public of the State of
North Carolina, at the offices of Womble Carlyle
Sandridge & Rice, 200 West Second Street,
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, on Tuesday, August 5,
1997, commencing at 9 :50 in the forenoon .

Vol . 5, Pg . 741

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------)
PHYLLIS SMALL and DENISE FUBINI, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
- against - )
)
LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY, INC ., ) Index No .
LORILLARD, INC ., LOEWS CORPORATION, ) 110949/96
COUNCIL FOR TOBACCO RESEARCH-USA, )
INC . (Successor to Tobacco Industry )
Research Committee), AND TOBACCO )
INSTITUTE, INC ., )
)
Defendants . )
------------------------------------)

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------)
MARY ANN HOSKINS, Executrix of the )
Estate of Edwin Paul Hoskins, )
WALTINA BROWN and DANTE AUBAIN, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
- against - )
)
R .J . REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, ) Index No .
RJR NABISCO, INC ., COUNCIL FOR ) 110951/96
TOBACCO RESEARCH-USA, INC . )
(Successor to Tobacco Industry )
INSTITUTE, INC ., )
)
Defendants . )
------------------------------------)

Vol . 5, Pg . 742

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------)
SHARLENE HOBERMAN and AUDREY HULSE, )
as Executrix, on behalf of the )
Estate of Lewis Hulse, individually, )
and on behalf of others similarly )
situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
) 110953/96
BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO )
CORPORATION, B .A .T . INDUSTRIES )
P .L .C ., BATUS, INC ., BATUS HOLDINGS, )
INC ., COUNCIL FOR TOBACCO RESEARCH- )
USA, INC . (Successor to Tobacco )
Industry Research Committee), AND )
TOBACCO INSTITUTE, INC . )
)
Defendants . )
-------------------------------------)
•
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------)
ROSE FROSINA, ELIZABETH COLAVITO and )
ANILDA ROSS, individually, and on )
behalf of others similarly situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
) 110950/96
PHILIP MORRIS, INC ., PHILIP MORRIS )
COMPANIES, INC ., COUNCIL FOR TOBACCO )
RESEARCH-USA, INC . (Successor to )
Tobacco Industry Research Committee) )
AND TOBACCO INSTITUTE, INC ., )
)
Defendants . )
-------------------------------------)
•
Vol . 5, Pg . 743
SUPREME COURT OF THE ESTATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------)
CATHERINE ZITO, PETER HOBERMAN, )
and GEORGE ELISSEOU, individually, )
and on behalf of others similarly )
situated, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
) 110952/96
THE AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY, INC ., )
AMERICAN BRANDS, INC ., COUNCIL FOR )
TOBACCO RESEARCH-USA, INC . )
(Successor to Tobacco Industry )
INSTITUTE, INC ., )
)
Defendants . )
-------------------------------------)
•
Vol . 5, Pg . 744
A P P E A R A N C E S :
J . D . LEE, ESQ .
422 Gay Street
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
(423) 544-0101
SHELLER, LUDWIG & BADEY

3rd Floor
1528 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102
BY : STEPHEN A . SHELLER, ESQ .
SHERRICE A . KNISELY, ESQ .
(215) 790-7300
CLIMACO, CLIMACO, LEFKOWITZ &

GAROFOLI CO ., L .P .A .
Ninth Floor, The Halle Building
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
• BY : JACK D . MAISTROS, ESQ .

(216) 621-8484
GOODKIND LABATON RUDOFF & SUCHAROW L .L .P .

100 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10017
BY : MARTIS ANN BRACHTL, ESQ .
For the Plaintiffs in New York case
(212) 907-0700
WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE

200 west Second Street
Post Office Drawer 84
BY : MARTIN L . HOLTON, III, ESQ .
For the Defendant R .J . Reynolds Tobacco Corp .
(910) 721-3600
•
Vol . 5, Pg . 745
A P P E A R A N C E S ( Cont inued )
• JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE

Metropolitan Square
1450 G Street N .W .
Washington, D . C . 20005-2088
BY : ROBERT F . McDERMOTT, JR ., ESQ .
For the Defendant R .J . Reynolds Tobacco Corp .
(202) 8 7 9 - 3 9 3 9
MCCALL DOUGHTON & BLANCATO

633 West Fourth Street
Suite 150
BY : WILLIAM A . BLANCATO, ESQ .
(910) 725-7531
For the witness Dr . Alan Rodgman
MILLER & MARTIN
• Suite 1000 Volunteer Building

832 Georgia Avenue
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402
BY : MARCIA MEREDITH EASON, ESQ .
(423) 756-6600
For the Defendant Lorillard Tobacco Company
•
Vol . 5, Pg . 746
I N D E X
WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS
ALAN RODGMAN, Ph .D .
Mr . Maistros 747
Mr . Sheller 806
Mr . Maistros 990
E X H I B I T S
EXHIBIT MARKED
Exhibit 1 . 761
847
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 871
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 898
• Exhibit 7 .
7A .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
901
903
7B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903
910
928
937
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940
Exhibit 12A . 951

12B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954
972
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996
996
•
Vol . 5, Pg . 747
r
1 ALAN RODGMAN, Ph .D .,
• 2 having been previously sworn, was examined and
3 testified further as follows :
4 VIDEOGRAPHER : This is day two of the
6 going on the record, Tuesday, August 5th, 1997, at
7 9 :50 a .m .
8 EXAMINATION (Continued)
10 Q . Good morning, Dr . Rodgman . How are
11 you?
12 A . Fine . And before we start, I'd like to
• 13
14
correct one thing from yesterday .
Q . Okay .
15 A . I had mentioned that in those boxes, wherever
16 they are, there were two notebook -- or material
17 from two notebooks about my publications . And
18 last night I was -- remembered that there is one
19 publication that is not in there . It's a paper
20 that Dr . Charles Green and I prepared for last
21 year's Tobacco Chemist Conference symposium . And
22 the symposium papers are published in a journal
23 called Recent Advances in Tobacco Science . And
24 our paper is in volume 22 .
• 25 The reason the copy isn't in there,

Vol . 5, Pg . 748
1 this is not a very well bound book . And if you
• 2 were to open it to copy it, the article is
3 170-something pages long, you would have to do
4 that for every double page to go on an
5 eight-and-a-half by eleven sheet . That book will
6 fall apart .
7 Now, if you want a copy, you can get
8 it from the North Carolina State University
9 library ; they have all the back available copies
10 of that journal, probably back to volume 9 or 10 .
11 Before that, they run out of them .
12 And, of course, the authors are given
13 five copies each, but I've given four of mine
14 away . So I only have the one left .
15 Q . That's pretty good, if that's the only
16 thing you want to correct from six hours .
17 A . Pardon?
18 Q . That's pretty good if that's the only
19 thing you want to correct from six hours .
20 A . Well I thought somebody would say : He did
21 something last year and it's not in there, and
22 picky, picky, picky . So I thought I'd correct it
23 right here and now .
24 Q . Not me .
• 25 Let me ask you about the six boxes of

Vol . 5, Pg . 749
1 documents . Where did they originally come from?
• 2 Were all these at your house, originally?
3 A . Yes .
4 Q . How did it come to be that you had
5 documents -- six boxes of documents at your house?
6 A . Well, some of them, I think, if you look at
7 them, were prepared since I retired, and some are
8 copies of the formal reports I wrote while I was
9 at Reynolds . And because of the peculiar way I
10 worked, during the daytime -- or normal working
11 hours -- for many years at Reynolds I was a lab
12 man . I did my research at the bench from 7 :30 in
13 the morning till five o'clock at night . And I did

• 14 a lot of my writing at home in the evenings ; much
15 to my wife's regret, I sometimes would write until
16 two o'clock in the morning . And in order to do
17 that, I would have pre -- previous reports I had
18 written so I could refer to the references, and so
19 on and so forth .
20 Q• And who did you turn these documents
21 over to?
22 A . When?
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Asked and answered .
• 25 Q . Originally . Your attorney or RJR's

Vol . 5, Pg . 750
1 attorney?
2 A . Mr . Blancato .
3 MR . McDERMOTT : I believe we went into
4 this yesterday .
5 MR . MAISTROS : I'm trying to
6 establish -- yesterday we had some objections to
7 conversations with you and attorney/client
8 privilege, and I'm just trying to establish how
9 there's an attorney/client privilege there . And
10 I'll get to that very shortly .
11 MR . McDERMOTT : Well, the providence
12 of these documents was reviewed yesterday . And,
13 again, if there is concern about using time
• 14 efficiently, I suggest we get into new areas .
15 MR . MAISTROS : Well . . .
17 Q . What is the attorney/client
18 relationship, if any, that you have with
19 Mr . McDermott? Do you have any attorney/client
20 relationship with Mr . McDermott?
21 A . Well he, I guess, represents Reynolds .

Ln
22 Q . And you are not currently an employee ~
a
~
m
23 of Reynolds, are you?
~
Ln
o.
24 A. No .
• 25 Q . So I want to know -- take me through

Vol . 5, Pg . 751
1 the conversations you've had with Mr . McDermott
2 concerning this case .
3 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . Counsel is
4 well aware of the fact that attorneys for
5 corporate entities are allowed to consult former
6 employees under an umbrella privilege, in order to
7 determine facts and prepare a defense . We are
8 invoking privilege .
9 If you've got something you want to do
10 that doesn't deal with my conversations relating
11 to litigation, you can pursue that . If you want
12 to deal with other conversations Dr . Rodgman has,
13 that's fine . But it is absolutely specious to
14 suggest that I cannot communicate with Dr . Rodgman
15 about events that occurred while he was an
16 employee that are not covered by privilege .
17 That's nonsense .
19 Q• And you -- do you consider yourself a
20 private person in this litigation?
21 A . I consider myself a private person, I guess .
22 I'm here because I was deposed .
23 Q . Do you consider yourself as working
24 for Reynolds in this litigation?
A . No, not really . No .

,

Vol . 5, Pg . 75 2
1 Q . And you're not being paid in any
• 2 fashion in the Arch litigation ?
3 A . I was not paid for Minnesota ; I'm not being
4 paid in Arch . In fact, I'm probably the only one
5 around this table that's not getting paid .
6 Q. The documents were not provided to -
7 from you to Mr . McDermott or any other RJR
8 attorney, they were provided to your personal
9 counsel, correct ?
10 A . That's right .
11 Q. Do you know what he did after he go t
12 them?
13 MR . BLANCATO : Well, he doesn't have
14 to disclose any priv -- that would be privileged .
16 Q . Do you know what he did after he go t
17 the documents ?
18 A . He arranged for them to be copied .
19 Q . Do you know what he did after that ?
20 MR . BLANCATO : Well, wait a minute .
2 1 You know -
22 MR . MAISTROS : How is that privileged?

~
I.-
23 I'm trying to establish how the documents got from N
m
24 the garage to this room . If you can tell me ho w Ln
• m
CO
25 they got from the garage to this room, do that .

Vol . 5, Pg . 753
1 THE WITNESS : From the garage --
• 2
3
MR . MAISTROS : I don't know how that's
privileged .
4 THE WITNESS : What garage are you
5 talking about?
7 Q . Your house, whatever . Where did you
8 store them?
9 A . There --
10 MR . McDERMOTT : Object . Asked and
11 answered .
12 MR . MAISTROS : Let's speed this up .
• 14 t2 • Can you tell me how the documents got
15 from your possession to this room?
16 MR . BLANCATO : Can I answer it?
17 MR . MAISTROS : If you know .
18 MR . BLANCATO : They were given to me .
19 We had them photocopied . A set was made for the
20 Reynolds attorneys, and the set that was here
21 yesterday was Mark Holton's extra set of those
22 photocopies . It should be the same -- a duplicate
23 set of what was sent to Ms . Knisely .
24 MS . KNISELY : Actually, I might be
• 25 able to shed some light on that, if I might .

Vol . 5, Pg . 754
1 From what I understand in my
2 conversations with McDermott and Mr . Holton, as
3 well as Mr . Blancato, and please correct me if I'm
4 wrong, those documents -- those documents were
5 originally provided to Mr . Blancato ; but I also
6 understand Mr . Blancato then provided them, prior
7 to the first deposition of Dr . Rodgman, to Womble
8 Carlyle, and most particularly, Mr . Holton went
9 through them originally to review for privilege,
10 as well as work product .
11 The two -- possibly one to two boxes
12 were provided at the last deposition . Our office
13 was advised that there were three to four other
• 14 boxes that had -- were being withheld for the
15 purpose of reviewing them again for privilege by
16 Reynolds' counsel . We were provided a subsequent
17 list of those withheld documents, minus any
18 privileged and a privilege log .
19 We've also been supplied a
20 supplemental privilege log, because I understand
21 Dr . Rodgman has reviewed his documents at home and
22 provided, I don't know who first, with copies of
23 two additional documents . And we received last
24 Fri -- Thursday or Friday, from Mr . Belasic, an
• 25 additional supplemental privileged log for two

Vol . 5, Pg . 755
1 additional documents .
• 2 Now, we were not advised of that by
3 Mr . Blancato . The privilege log did not come from
4 Mr . Blancato . I also understand that the copies
5 of the documents were made here at Womble Carlyle .
6 Now, I also understand that perhaps
7 Dr . Rodgman may or may not have been present
8 during various review processes of the documents .
9 Is that all accurate?
10 MR . BLANCATO : No .
11 MR . McDERMOTT : I don't know the
12 extent to which it's accurate or not . But let me
13 suggest, to the extent you all are concerned about
• 14 time, this does not concern Dr . Rodgman, as such .
15 The lawyers can spar among themselves over breaks
16 and after Dr . Rodgman goes . If this is how you
17 want to use your time with the witness in the
18 chair, we can have lawyers talking all day long .
19 I suggest it is not a particularly fruitful
20 expenditure of time, however .
21 MS . KNISELY : I believe Mr . Maistros
22 was trying to go into the questioning of the chain
23 of custody of the documents and Dr . Rodgman's
24 knowledge of that .
• 25 MR . McDERMOTT : And I --

Vol . 5, Pg . 756
1 MS . KNISELY : And I think that's
• 2 perfectly appropriate .
3 MR . MCDERMOTT : And I believe you will
4 find that Dr . Rodgman doesn't know that the
5 documents passed from his hands, as indicated, and
6 it was Mr . Blancato who was providing further
7 information . Use your time as you wish .
8 MR . MAISTROS : I will offer -- I will
9 offer, once again, to a stipulation that the --
10 insofar as authenticity is concerned, that we have
11 a stipulation on those six boxes of documents . I
12 don't think we've put that in the record . You've
• 13
14
declined that, just so the record is clear .
So I will go through, and you can take
15 a break if you want to do this . I want you to go
16 through the six boxes today and tell me which ones
17 you have problems that aren't authentic, aren't
18 original -- or copies of originals, and you would
19 dispute are not of business records of Reynolds .
20 You can do that at lunch, you can do it tonight, I
21 don't care when you do it . I'm not going to take
22 the time up today . But unless we get a
23 stipulation, I want you to go through those six
24 boxes .
0 25 1 THE WITNESS : Sir, I've been through

Vol . 5, Pg . 757
1 those six boxes .
3 Q . And you believe they're all business
4 records of Reynolds?
5 MR . BLANCATO : Object to the form .
7 Q . Other than the ones that you did
8 before you joined Reynolds and the ones that you
9 did after you joined Reynolds?
10 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form .
11 THE WITNESS : Well, I wasn't sure what
12 you folks really wanted . And I think you'll find,
0 13 for example, obituaries of my two mentors at the
14 University of Toronto . You'll find an award I was
15 given for -- the testimony I was -- for an award I
16 was given for my participation in Little League
17 programs, and things like that . I just put it all
18 in there and you've got it .
19 MR . McDERMOTT : And, again, we're not
20 claiming any of those documents are fraudulent .
21 So as to authenticity, what you said is not
22 correct .
23 We spoke last night, outside, after
24 the deposition, about breaking the documents down
25 into categories . Those documents which are

Vol . 5, Pg . 758
1 clearly copies of Reynolds' materials and
2 Reynolds' records we're not going to be picayune
3 about .
4 There are materials in those boxes,
5 however, which are not business records of
6 Reynolds . We talked about segregating them into
7 categories ; we can do that now or later . But to
8 suggest that we are responsible for your not
9 having examined the documents and been a little
10 bit more systematic about how we treat these
11 documents is again nonsense . I suggest that we
12 use this witness' time more efficiently than we
• 13
14
are doing now .
MR . SHELLER : I just want to put
15 something on the record that -- I would note that,
16 when we had the conversation with the judge's law
17 clerk, Judge Newcomer's law clerk, Mr . Blancato
18 was agreeable to allow me to question the witness,
19 rather than bother Judge Newcomer on vacation or
20 have the other law clerk intervene, when
21 Mr . McDermott interfered and told Mr . Blancato to
22 wait for the second law clerk's call at 11 :00 a .m .
23 to see what he said . I would also note that I
24 watch Mr . McDermott constantly coaching
• 25 Mr . Blancato .

Vol . 5, Pg . 759
1 Mr . McDermott, if you want to
2 represent Mr . Rodgman, why don't you change seats
3 with Mr . Blancato . Otherwise, I suggest that
4 Mr . Blancato, if he really is Mr . Rodgman's
5 counsel, that you leave him alone and stop
6 interfering with his decision processes .
7 MR . McDERMOTT : I will respond to this
8 nonsense after Dr . Rodgman is gone . If you keep
9 giving speeches, Mr . Sheller, I will not look
10 kindly on your petition for more time . I think
11 you've burned that bridge already .
13 Dr . Rodgman, I would like to take you

• 14
Q .
through the manufacturing process and your
15 knowledge of the same at Reynolds during the years
16 you were there, okay?
17 You have been -- I'll show you --
18 we'll mark it later . I only have one copy . It's
19 a designation of yourself that was provided in the
20 Texas litigation . And I'd ask you, before I have
21 it marked, have you seen that document before?
22 (Witness reviews document)

Ln
23 A . I saw this a couple of minutes before we met ~
~
m
24 here this morning . ,P.
Ln
• 25 Q . Who showed you that? "'

J

Vol . 5, Pg . 760
A . The gentleman here .
Q . Which gentleman?
A . Mr . McDermott .
Q . And what was his purpose of showing
you that?
A . Well, because yesterday it was -- you had
mentioned that I was supposed to be an expert in
manu -- things about manufacturing . And I said
something to the effect that I was not an expert .
10 Now, this business about manufacture,
11 the one that was -- the opinion list that was sent
12 to Texas does not have that in there .
13 I did not write this . I didn't --
14 I've never seen it till this morning .
15 Q . Are you suggesting, then, that the
16 designation that's in this exhibit, which we'll
17 mark Rodgman Exhibit 1 for purposes of this
18 deposition, is accurate? You are going to testify
19 concerning the design, construction, manufacture
20 of cigarettes?
21 A . Well, I think, someplace down later on in
22 there, it says familiarity with manufacturing
23 processes in general . And I would agree that I
24 know a little bit about it, but I am not an expert
• 25 in the manufacture of cigarettes .

Vol . 5, Pg . 761
1 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 1 was
• 2 marked for identification)
4 Did you know you were going to testify
5 in Texas with respect to the design, construction
6 and manufacture of cigarettes?
7 A . As I say, this -- I saw this, this morning .
8 It's different from the one that I had seen
9 earlier, which is three pages long .
10 MR . McDERMOTT : For the record,
11 counsel, this is a preliminary disclosure which
12 was produced some weeks ago in accordance with the
• 13
14
case management order where the final list of
Dr . Rodgman's opinions was filed, or at least
15 provided to opposing counsel last week .
17 Q . Do you have knowledge concerning the
18 design, construction and manufacture of cigarettes
19 at Reynolds?
20 A . Well, that's an all-sweeping statement, sir .
21 I know -- as I say, I know a little bit about the
22 manufacturing . I know a little bit more about the
23 design . As you know, most of my work has been
24 involved in the smoke composition, it's con -- and
• 25 its control .

Vol . 5, Pg . 762
r
1 Q . And what do you know about the
2 manufacturing process?
3 A . Well, as I mentioned in my testimony
4 yesterday, when you buy tobacco on the auction
5 market, the first thing you do, you bring the
6 tobacco in to the facility, stemery . You
7 moistened it ; you warm it so it doesn't fragment ;
8 you cut out the stems . You store the lamina
9 separately from the stems, and they're stored in
10 sheds for various periods of time, usually from 12
11 to 15 months, up to two years . And while they're
12 in the storage shed, the tobacco slowly changes in
13 certain ways .
14 And when it's withdrawn from the shed
15 at the appropriate time for manufacture, it's
16 taken out of the containers, it's moistened,
17 warmed ; it's called "reordering ." And if you're
18 talking flue-cured tobacco or burley, then you
19 start your blending process . It's done in --
20 usually in two lines : Part of the blend is done
21 in one line, part in another . Because you also
22 have to bring in Oriental tobacco and Maryland
23 tobacco . Oriental tobacco comes from abroad and
24 has to go through customs, and so on and so forth .
0 25 And at that point, the stems, of

Vol . 5, Pg . 763
1 course, can be used to make reconstituted tobacco .
2 That is incorporated in part of the blend . And
3 part of the tobacco, the flue-cured burley part,
4 is expanded . And that whole thing comes together
5 and mixed, and it's cut . And there you have the
6 blend for the -- what goes into the cigarettes .
7 And that -- the last thing that's done
8 on the cigarette is called -- the cutting and
9 casing operation is when the casing materials and
10 flavorants are added and the cigarette blend is
11 all ready to be run through the cigarette-making
12 machine .
13 And at that point it's put in hoppers

S 14 to feed the cigarette-making machine . It runs
15 through the cigarette-making machine ; the paper's
16 wrapped around it and stuck together . The filters
17 are inserted into the cigarettes in pairs .
18 Cigarettes are cut -- the tobacco rod
19 part is two units long and it's cut in the middle,
20 and the double filter is dropped in between and
21 they're attached . And at that point the thing is
22 cut in half and -- through a very neat, little Ln

N
J
23 device that Reynolds invented . The one set of ~
24 cigarettes is flipped over so they're all facing Ln

J
• 25 the same way, and then they're inserted in

to

Vol . 5, Pg . 764
packages . The packages are sealed . The packages
• are incorporated into the cartons, and the cartons
are incorporated into big cartons, and they're
shipped out the door .
Q . At what point in the manufacturing
process does Reynolds know that a certain tobacco
is going to end up in a certain brand of its
cigarettes?
MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form of
10 the question .
11 THE WITNESS : Sir, I have very little
12 knowledge about the precise nature of blends and
13 how they're put together .
• 14 BY MR . MAISTROS :
15 Q . Do you know what's added to the
16 cigarettes in the manufacturing process?
18 the question .
19 MS . EASON : Object to the form of the
20 question .
22 Q . What compounds?
23 A . I know something of the -- what goes into the
24 casing material .
• 25 Q . Do you know if there's a compound

Vol . 5, Pg . 765
1 that's applied to the tobacco itself during any
2 portion in the manufacturing process?
3 A . Would you say that again, sir .
4 Q . Is there a compound that's applied to
5 the tobacco itself during the manufacturing
6 process?
7 A . Yes .
8 Q . What compounds?
9 A . Well, glycerin, propylene glycol, licorice,
10 sugar, cocoa, and then the flavor formulation .
11 Q . Anything else?
12 A . Well, during the expansion of the tobacco
there is an agent used in the expansion -- or was

• 13
14 used ; it's no longer used at Reynolds .
15 Q . What's that?
16 A . It's Freon 11 .
17 Q . And what years was Freon 11 used?
18 A . 1969 to sometime after I left Reynolds . I
19 don't know when they quit using it .
20 Q . What is Freon 11?
21 A . Freon 11 is similar to the material that's in
22 your air conditioner -- car air conditioner and
23 your refrigerator . It's called a
24 chlorofluorocarbon .
• 25 Q . Who developed the process to use

Vol . 5, Pg . 766
Freon 11 during the manufacturing process?
A . The original work was done by Dr . James D .
Fredrickson in the laboratory . And then two other
gentlemen developed the engineering aspects of the
process --
Q . What was the original --
A . -- Moser and Stewart .
Q . I'm sorry . What was the first one?
A . Moser, M-O-S-E-R ; and Stewart, S-T-E-W-A-R-T .
10 Q . What was --
11 A . And there were two patents issued to these
12 gentlemen ; one the theory part and one the
13 engineering part . They were issued the same day
• 14 and are sequential in the patent list .
15 Q . This process went till sometime after
16 1987?
17 A . I don't know when they quit using Freon 11 .
18 Q . Do you know why they quit using it?
19 A . Because of the ozone question .
20 Q . What was the ozone question? Ln

J
21 A . Well, freon is a very -- well, extremely m

~
Ln
22 inert substance . That's, you know, why it's N
23 used -- how it became used as a refrigerant .
24 However, when freon vaporizes -- it's a liquid ; it
25 boils at a very low temperature . When it

Vol . 5, Pg . 767
1 vaporizes, it rises through the atmosphere and is
• 2 so inert that very little happens to it until it
3 gets into the stratosphere . And then it comes
4 apart on the effect of intense sunlight . And,
5 supposedly, part of the degradation products
6 combined with oxygen -- combined with ozone in the
7 stratosphere and -- convert ozone, which is a
8 trimolec -- triatomic form of oxygen, breaks it
9 down into regular oxygen . And when that layer
10 thins, the ozone layer thins, more types of
11 sunlight can get through to the earth's surface .
12 And that's supposed to cause all sorts of
• 13
14
problems .
So, some years back, I forget the
15 exact year, there was a move to diminish --
16 decrease the use of ozone freon -- Freon 11 and
17 Freon 12, which were the two main compounds used
18 in refrigeration .
19 Q . Was there -- prior to '69, was there
20 expansion of tobacco at Reynolds?
21 A. No . That's -- well, experimentally there
22 was . Dr . Fredrickson did the work in -- I believe
23 it was '63 that he actually did the lab work,
24 looking at a whole variety of solvents that could
• 25 be used in the expansion process .

Vol . 5, Pg . 768
1 And from then till 1968/'69, we were
2 looking at -- Reynolds was looking at the
3 incorporation of expanded tobacco into blends and
4 whether the consumers would accept this . And they
5 did, on test panels and market testing and so on .
6 And it was, I believe, introduced into Reynolds'
7 products -- it was either late '68 or early '69 .
8 Q . And do you know if there were other
9 expansion processes being used, other than the use
10 of Freon 11?
11 A . Well, when we came up with the expanded
12 tobacco, it was -- I don't know whether you're
13 familiar with how competitors look at each other' s
14 products, but when somebody has a -- products are
15 monitored frequently by competitors . And of
16 course it did not take long for some of our
17 competitors -- what they do is you take a bunch of
18 cigarettes, and you cut the paper off, and you
19 have a pile of tobacco . And you have some
20 technicians, who are usually very skilled at it,
21 and they pick out the burley tobacco, the

Ln
22 flue-cured tobacco, the oriental tobacco, the ~
~
N
m
23 reconstituted tobacco sheet, and say : Look, you
~
Ln
OD
24 know, what's Reynolds got in this blend? Or we 4~1
0 25 look and say : What's Philip Morris got?

Vol . 5, Pg . 769
1 Well, it's obvious, when they picked
2 apart the Winston in 1968 or '69, whenever it was
3 issued, they got a fifth pile . You know, what's
4 this tobacco that's all fluffy? And so everybody
5 knew that we had expanded tobacco .
6 Now, people had been trying to expand
7 tobacco for years . They could succeed in
8 expanding stems, but no one had been able to
9 expand the lamina of tobacco - that's the leaf
10 part - until Dr . Fredrickson discovered how to do
11 it .
12 And, of course, soon after that, some
13 other people -- Philip Morris came up with an
14 expansion process of its own . Prior to that, we
15 elected to -- if anybody wanted our process, we
16 would license our expansion process to anybody who
17 was willing to pay the licensing fee . And the
18 Japanese tobacco company, which is an immense
19 company, licensed it ; Lorillard licensed it, L & M
20 licensed it . Eventually our process was licensed
21 in probably 25, 30 countries around the world .
22 But Philip Morris elected not to
23 license it, our process . And that's because they
24 had been responsible, primarily, for all the
patents on expansion of stems, and I think they

Vol . 5, Pg . 770
1 were a little miffed that they had worked so long
2 trying to expand tobacco, had been successful in
3 stems and unsuccessful with lamina . And I think
4 there's a bit of pride there .
5 So they had developed a process of
6 their own - it involved the use of different
7 expansion agent - and used that in their own
8 c i garettes .
9 Q. Which agent?
10 A . It was -- it was called ammonium carbonate .
11 Q . Back to my original question ; maybe
12 you misunderstood it .
• 13
14 process,
Did RJR use any other expansion
other than Freon 11?
15 MR . McDERMOTT : During what time
16 f rame ?
17 MR . MAISTROS : '69 to when you ceased
18 working, consulting or advising RJR, whatever it
19 is .
20 THE WITNESS : Well, when I left they
21 were still using Freon 11 .
22 BY MR . MAISTROS : Ln
~
J
N
23 Q. Was that the only expansion process m
~
Ln
24 RJR use d? CO
m
• 25 A . Well, we kept looking at different things .

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 771
1 For example -- as I say, Dr . Fredrickson looked
2 at -- and I think if -- you probably have it
3 someplace, his report in 1963 ; he must have looked
4 at 15 different solvents . And there was a problem
5 with them, and primarily in manufacturing, that
6 some of the solvents -- for example, ethyl alcohol
7 will work ; hexane will work ; pentane will work .
8 But one of the problems is, here you
9 have this facility to expand tobacco with pentane
10 or hexane, and I'm sure you know that they are
11 components of gasoline . And they're -- hexane --
12 gaseous hexane and air is a very explosive
13 mixture .
14 And -- but Freon 11 was designed in
15 edict by Boss Kettering at General Motors to be
16 inert, non-flammable and usable in a car engine
17 for air conditioning of the car . So it does not
18 burn ; it's not explosive ; it has very little -- in
19 fact, it was so inert it has very little
20 biological effect on anything . And so we -- of
21 the 15 or 20, I forget the exact number that
22 Dr . Fredrickson looked at, we ended up using
23 Freon 11 .
24 Q . Did Reynolds test the biological
0 25 effects of Freon 11 before it incorporated it in

Vol . 5, Pg . 772
1 the manufacturing process?
2 A . Well, we didn't need -- we did . But we
3 didn't really need to, because Freon 11 is the --
4 was a patented or copyright, whatever -- a product
5 owned by DuPont . And they had done so much work
6 on the biological properties of Freon 11, Freon
7 12, that acceptance of their data -- but we did do
8 some things to see how it affected tobacco smoke .
9 4• Were studies done to determine
10 biological effect of taking Freon 11 through the
11 respiratory system?
12 A . Not by us . But Philip Morris -- not Philip
13 Morris, DuPont had done that .
14 In fact, the FDA had approved -- I
15 don't know whether any of you have had -- have
16 asthma, but for many years there were little
17 propellant gadgets with medication in them that
18 you placed against your nostrils and pressed the
19 button and, psst, psst, you got shots of the
20 medication plus the propellant .
21 Well the propellant, in most
22 instances, was either Freon 11 or a mixture of
23 Freon 11 and 12 . And that had all been checked
24 out by the FDA and so on . And in using those
inhalers, the amount you got on one squirt was

Vol . 5, Pg . 773
1 something between 25 and 35 milligrams, which
• 2
3
would -- say, 25 milligrams is 25 million
nanograms, which was the equivalent of what was in
4 the smoke of many, many cigarettes, but less than
5 a nanogram of Freon 11 in the smoke of one
6 cigarette after we made it .
7 Q . Did -- to your knowledge, did DuPont
8 test Freon 11 in a state after it had been burned,
9 such as in a smoking process?
10 A . No . But over at Triangle -- Research
11 Triangle, there was a group that was doing work on
12 various things . And I don't know whether you
13 remember that, at one time, there was a big
14 problem with -- in Philadelphia, with what turned
15 out to be called the Legionnaire's disease . And
16 the cause of Legionnaire's disease was -- the
17 first cause was that an air conditioner or
18 refrigerator had malfunctioned and there had been
19 a fire, that the Freon 11 or 12, what was ever
20 used in the refrigerator, had decomposed or
21 something during this fire, generating phosgene,
22 which was a World War I gas used by the Germans to
23 kill Allied troops . And that was supposed to be
24 the cause of Legionnaire's disease .
• 25 Well, this group over at Research

Vol . 5, Pg . 774
1 Triangle took Freon 11 and studied its effect on
• 2 combustion, studied its effect on -- in cigarette
3 smoke, and the formation of cigarette smoke, and
4 so on and so forth, and found that it does not
5 generate phosgene . But -- and then, of course,
6 Legionnaire's disease was found to be an entire -
7 caused by a bacteria of some type, which -- whose
8 name escapes me .
9 Q . What year was that research done?
10 A . Over at the Triangle? Oh, early '70s, I
11 would say . I forget .
12 But we did in-house -- one of the
13 things we worried about was the effect of -- would
14 Freon 11, during the com -- smoking process, form
15 phosgene . Because, if you look at the structure
16 of phosgene, the structure of Freon 11, it's
17 obvious that, given the right circumstance, it was
18 possible .
19 So we did a study, great detail ; we
20 had to develop all the analytical procedures for
21 it, to determine nanograms of phosgene, and so on
22 and so forth, in smoke . And we conducted it --
23 could find no phosgene in the smoke of a cigarette
24 made with expanded tobacco, with a lot more freon
• 25 than would be in a commercial product . We had

Vol . 5, Pg . 775
1 that checked by a contract lab, Industrial
• 2 Bio-Test . They came up -- they couldn't find it .
3 And as I say, the group over in Research Triangle
4 couldn't find anything wrong with -- at least
5 phosgene generation .
6 Then a man in Germany, because we were
7 going to license our process in Germany, he looked
8 at the question, because I had given presentation
9 to several companies in Germany on our process as
10 part of the licensing ploy . And he was intrigued
11 by it all . And -- and he was a physical chemist .
12 And he took -- looked at the thing
13 from phosgene and the conditions in a burning

• 14 cigarette and said : You folks didn't need to do
15 the experiments . That if you just looked at the
16 thermodynamic calculation, it's impossible to
17 generate freon -- phosgene from freon in a burning
18 cigarette .
19 Q . Let me just cut you off for a second,
20 because I know time is a concern .
21 The question was that, prior to using
22 Freon 11 in the tobacco manufacturing process, Ln

N
~
23 first, did Reynolds do any testing to determine m
4~-
24 the effect of burning of the Freon 11? ~
N
• 25 A . I just told you .

1

Vol . 5, Pg . 776
1 Q . I don't think you answered my
2 question .
3 Prior to the use of Freon 11 in the
4 manufacturing process, did RJR do any testing to
5 determine the effect of burning the freon?
6 A . Between 1963 and 1970, sir, we did the
7 phosgene work ; we did what's called a material
8 balance study .
9 If you end up with a cigarette blend
10 that's got so much -- a certain percentage of
11 expanded tobacco and that expanded tobacco has so
12 much freon on it - and here we're talking
• 13
14
nanograms, parts per million - that we examine
what happened to that freon during smoking ; where
15 did it end up? Obviously, if it didn't form
16 phosgene, it exits the smoke -- exits in the smoke
17 as Freon 11 itself . And we determined what was in
18 the mainstream smoke, the sidestream smoke, how
19 much was retained in the cigarette filter, so on
20 and so forth, and could account for everything in
21 the Freon 11 business of where it ended up in the
22 smoke . That was all done before it ever went into
23 the cigarette .
24 Q• Did you determine if there were any
• 25 other compounds that were created during the

Vol . 5, Pg . 777
1 burning process as a result of the addition of
2 Freon 11?
3 A . I just finished telling you . Freon 11 is so
4 inert that -- if it won't form phosgene, it won't
5 form anything else . Now, we could account for, in
6 our material balance study, if you had -- and here
7 I'll just pick a figure, because I'm sure you have
the document that I wrote -- put together on the
9 T13 process, and I've forgotten the numbers . But
10 say you had ten nanograms of Freon 11 on a
11 cigarette . You get so much in the mainstream
12 smoke, so much in the sidestream smoke, so much in
• 13
14
the -- the tobacco part of the butt, so much in
the filter tip . And then, in the way you
15 determine this, there was some Freon 11 on the
16 walls of the gadgetry where you collect the smoke,
17 which is a very small amount . So if you had ten
18 nanograms to start with, we could account for all
19 of it .
20 MR . McDERMOTT : Let me point out,
21 counsel, that the report Dr . Rodgman just referred
22 to is, in fact, attached as an exhibit to the
23 first part of this deposition, and a lot of this
24 was covered in detail in the initial part of the
• 25 deposition . But you may use your time as you w

Vol . 5, Pg . 778
1 choose .
3 Q . Did you do any tests to determine the
4 effect of Freon 11 -- or the burning of Freon 11
5 on nicotine content or yield of the tobacco?
6 A . No . The -- part of the -- well, indirectly .
7 You -- you asked about freon itself . But,
8 obviously, if you have expanded tobacco in a
9 cigarette, you have less tobacco in the cigarette .
10 Correct? Then, when you smoke that cigarette,
11 you're going to get less nicotine in the smoke .
12 And if you look at the Surgeon
• 13
14
General -- not the Surgeon General, I'm sorry, the
National Cancer Institute study, they repeated and
15 confirmed the effect of our expansion process,
16 Philip Morris' expansion process, and the one
17 developed at North Carolina State, which was
18 actually a freeze-dried tobacco that was expanded .
19 All of them were significant in their
20 contribution, if you will, to a less hazardous
21 cigarette, but all of them dropped the nicotine in
22 the smoke . And that's in the data and -- by our
23 National Cancer Institute .
24 Again, though, the primary motivation
S 251 behind expanded tobacco was not to drop nicotine,

Vol . 5, Pg . 779
1 was it?
2 A . Well, I think I mentioned yesterday, when we
3 talked about the technologies, if you read
4 Dr . Fredrickson's proposal --
5 Q . I'm going to cut you off because I
6 want a specific answer to this specific question .
7 Did RJR develop the expansion process to reduce
8 nicotine or did they do it so that they could --
9 A . If you let me answer the question, sir .
10 There's one -- two purposes for
11 expanded tobacco . One, money . The second was to
12 design a cigarette that would have reduced total
• 13
14
particulate matter in the smoke . And if you
reduce the total particulate matter in the smoke,
15 you would reduce the nicotine .
16 Q . What was the first purpose of
17 expansion of tobacco? Out of the two .
18 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . Asked and
19 answered .
21 Q . It was money, wasn't it? The primary
22 purpose was money?
23 A . Well, he had two things in his report .
24 Q. Wasn't the primary purpose of the
0 25+ expanded tobacco process -

Vol . 5, Pg . 780
I
1 A . No, it wasn't .
2 Q . It wasn't money? It was to reduce the
3 particulate matter?
4 A . No, it -- I will say that -- make -- make
5 them equal, if you want .
6 Q . I invite you on a break to go over the
7 six boxes of documents and show me one where
8 reduction of particulate matter was mentioned
9 above money .
10 MR . MCDERMOTT : Objection .
11 MR . BLANCATO : Objection to form .
Q . The very first document that ever was
created that discussed Freon 11 and the expansion
15 of tobacco, do you know if it ever mentioned the
16 goal of reducing the particulate matter in the
17 smoke?
18 A . Well, as I say, Dr . Fredrickson's first memo
19 didn't mention any specific solvents, because he
20 didn't know which ones would work, if any .
21 Q . Didn't his first memo say that the
22 primary advantage of expansion of tobacco was to 1-n

~
~
23 use less tobacco in the cigarettes and thereby m
~
24 increase the profits to Reynolds? Ln
m
25 A . I don't know whether he had it that -- you

Vol . 5, Pg . 781
1 probably read it more recently than I have, but I
• 2 don't remember him saying it that way .
3 Q . Did you examine the other tobacco
4 manufacturers' processes that they used to expand
5 tobacco?
6 A . Yes . We looked at ammonium carbonate .
7 Q . How did -- I'm sorry .
8 A . We looked at carbon dioxide puffing, which
9 actually other people looked at . Nitrogen was
10 used by some people . And of course -- we did not
11 spend much time looking at the process North
12 Carolina State University had, the freeze drying
13 procedure .
• 14 Q . The ammonia process, what's the full
15 name, do you know, that you mentioned?
16 A . Pardon?
17 Q . The ammonia process that you
18 mentioned, what's the full name?
19 A . Well, it's -- ammonium carbonate is the
20 expansion agent, mixture of ammonium carbonate and
21 ammonium bicarbonate .
22 Q . And which companies were using that
23 process?
24 A . Philip Morris ended up with the U .S . patent
• 25 for it .

Vol . 5, Pg . 782
1 S2 • Did you study how the ammonium
2 carbonated -- carbonate affected nicotine content?
3 A . We -- we looked at the ammonium carbonate as
4 an ex -- expansion means . I don't know whether --
5 a man called Charles D . Mays did the work on the
6 ammonium carbonate expansion . I don't know what
7 he looked at in terms of nicotine .
8 But the chances are that, if you --
9 looking at the ammonium carbonate puffed tobacco
10 that was involved in the National Cancer Institute
11 study, that the nicotine level in the tobacco was
12 reduced . And I have -- I would take a guess that
13 Charles Mays found the same thing when he did --
14 checked it at Reynolds . But I -- I can't say that
15 for sure .
16 Q . Did you explore the possibility of
17 Reynolds using the ammonium carbonate method of
18 expansion?
19 A . No -- well, let me back up on that .
20 At -- at -- when we were looking at
21 various expansion methods, of course we were very
22 pleased with the Freon 11 exercise .
23 Dr . Fredrickson looked at other things, and one of
24 them happened to be ammonium carbonate .
• 25 In fact, if you look at the patents

Vol . 5, Pg . 783
1 issued in the -- I think it's Belgium, Reynolds
2 has the first patent on -- was issued a patent on
3 ammonium carbonate before Philip Morris . We did
4 make a mistake, I guess you would consider it a
5 mistake, that we decided not to file a patent in
6 the United States, and Philip Morris -- I think
7 the rule is you have to file -- if you have a
8 foreign patent, you've got to do it within a year .
9 Philip Morris filed the patent in the
10 United States, so they had the patent on ammonium
11 carbonate puffing . And -- even though ours, in
12 Europe, preceded theirs .
13 But we had looked at it ; we looked at

• 14 many things . We looked at carbon dioxide as a
15 puffing agent and --
16 Q . And you said you looked at nitrogen?
17 A . Now, somebody else had reported nitrogen . We
18 checked to see how that would work . It's a little
19 difficult to handle, because, to get it to work,
20 you have to have liquid nitrogen, and liquid
21 nitrogen is -- requires a temperature of, I don't
22 know, minus 270-something degrees .
23 Q . Do you know who was using nitrogen
24 process?
• 25 A . I don't know whether anybody was using it .

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 78 4
1 It was reported that it would expand tobacco . I
2 don't know if it was in a patent or what .
3 Q . Did you -- are you saying that
4 Reynolds didn't seriously explore the use of
5 nitrogen to expand tobacco ?
6 A . Well, we looked at it . As I say, from
7 1970 -- '68, '69, till I left, they were still
8 using Freon 11 . And so were all the people that
9 licensed it from us .
1 0 Q . Was Reynolds using any other expansio n
11 processes for tobacco that was sold and markete d
12 overseas?
• 13
14
A . No .
Q. To your knowledge, then, the onl y
15 expansion process Reynolds has ever used is th e
16 Freon 11?
17 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection ; misstates
18 prior testimony .
19 THE WITNESS : Until I left . I think
20 I've said that about five times, sir .
21 When I left Reynolds in 1987, they
22 were using Freon 11 . And if they're using
23 anything else since then, I have no idea what it
24 would be .
1

Vol . 5, Pg . 785
Q . Do you know who was using carbon
dioxide expansion?
A . A company called Airco was the one that
pioneered the use -- or at least pushed the C02
expansion of tobacco . And that was another case
where Reynolds had actually been the first to look
at C02 expansion and decided not to proceed with
it because it took rather bulky machinery, and so
on and so forth, and was no less effective
10 than was -- than our process . And, of course,
11 subsequently, Airco got the patent on it, I
12 believe --
• 13
14
Q . Do you know if Reynolds ever used
ammonia or any compound related to ammonia in the
15 manufacturing process, other than -- let's
16 back up .
17 In any fashion, were you aware that
18 Reynolds used ammonia in the manufacturing
19 process?
20 A . Well, I think I said yesterday, they used
21 ammonia to denicotinize high nicotine tobaccos
22 down to whatever level they wanted . And I can't
23 think of the date, but at one time they were
24 using -- ammoniating their reconstituted tobacco
• 25 sheet .

Vol . 5, Pg . 786
1 Q• Why did they use ammonia on their
• 2 reconstituted tobacco sheet?
3 A . Well, they were trying to -- in the Philip
4 Morris products, the -- their reconstituted
5 tobacco sheet is made by an ammoniate -- ammonia
6 process . And when Marlboro be -- began to look
7 like such a winner, we wondered, well, should we
8 do something to our sheet to -- to imitate the
9 ammoniated effect of the Philip Morris sheet, and
10 we obviously couldn't use -- without royalties and
11 so on, the procedure used by Philip Morris, which
12 involved treatment of the sheet material with an
• 13
14
ammonium salt .
Q . Do you know why Philip Morris did
15 that?
16 A . I guess they wanted a sheet of their own .
17 Q . No . What is the chemical effect of
18 adding ammonia salt to the reconstituted tobacco?
19 A . Well, the addition of the ammonium salts to
20 the -- you're not adding them to the reconstituted
21 tobacco . What happens is that stems -- stemmed
22 material have some compounds in it that are
23 calcium salts of pectic acid, P-E-C-T-I-C . And
24 you want to get that calcium away from the pectic
• 25 acid . So if you treat it with a compound, one of

Vol . 5, Pg . 787
1 the ammonium phosphate salts, the ammonia replaces
2 the calcium as the pectic acid -- to make an
3 ammonium salt of pectic acid, instead of the
4 calcium salt . And the calcium combines with the
5 phosphate part of the ammonium phosphate that you
6 added, and calcium phosphate is very insoluble in
7 water . So the ammonium pectate, now, can be made
8 into a sheet much easier and a much nicer sheet
9 than the calcium pectate material .
10 That's what I got out of the patent
11 they had .
12 Q . Well, how did that affect the
• 13
14
popularity of Marlboros?
15 the question ; no foundation .
16 THE WITNESS : I have no idea why it
17 affected the popularity .
19 Q . Why did you mention Marlboros?
20 A . Well it's their main -- major product . And
21 as I say, we did the same kind of thing that
22 everybody does : We looked at their product, and
23 all of a sudden they had a reconstituted tobacco
24 that was different . About 1968, I guess, it was,
• 25 '69 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 788
1 Q . And did you find or did you discover
2 any effect that the ammonia -- ammonia process
3 that Philip Morris used had an effect on the
4 nicotine yields of the tobacco?
5 A . I don't know what they looked at, sir .
6 Q . You didn't look at that?
7 A . I didn't look at that .
8 Q . Did Reynolds look at that?
9 A . I don't know what they looked at . I think
10 they were interested in the sheet, per se . And,
11 of course, the one thing about -- when you make a
12 sheet, like reconstituted tobacco, you're actually
13 starting something that's rather low in nicotine
14 anyway . Stems have much less nicotine than the -
15 the lamina .
16 Q . Do you know if Reynolds did any
17 studies to determine if Philip Morris was
18 controlling the amount of nicotine yields of its
19 reconstituted tobacco?
20 A . I don't know whether we did or not .
21 Q . Did Reynolds do any independent work
22 on the effect that ammonia had on nicotine yields? cn

N
-j
23 Separate and apart from looking at Philip Morris . m

OPb
24 A . If it did, I don't recall . m

to.
• 25 Q . Do you know if Reynolds did any work

Vol . 5, Pg . 789
to determine the effect that any compound had on
the nicotine yields of cigarettes?
A . There was a study, I believe it was done by
Miss Janet Wheeler, putting various additives in a
filter tip to see the effect on -- how it would
affect the nicotine level in smoke . Like acetic
materials put in the filter tip, would that --
nicotine is a basic compound . And'my vague
recollection is that, when you use some of these
10 additives, you got to -- have a problem with
11 acceptability on test panels . But it's been years
12 since I even thought about that .
13 Q . Do you know if Philip Morris did any
14 research to determine the effect that its
15 additives had on the nicotine yields of these
16 cigarettes and the end product nicotine yields?
17 MR . McDERMOTT : Excuse me . Your
18 question was Philip Morris?
19 MR . MAISTROS : I'm sorry . RJR .
20 THE WITNESS : Would you say that
21 again, sir .
23 Q . Do you know if RJR did research to
24 determine the effect that any of its additives had
25 on the nicotine yields of the tobacco, other than

Vol . 5, Pg . 790
1 the filter one you just mentioned?
2 A . Well, in an indirect way . For example, we
3 did a study on use of humectants, glycerol and
4 propylene glycol, part of the casing material for
cigarettes . And of course'your main concern with
6 the humectants is that they help the cigarette
7 retain its moisture level at manufacturing . And
8 of course, being here in the south, when you
9 manufacture cigarettes in Winston-Salem and then
10 you ship them to California or wherever, you have
11 problem sometimes that there they're locked in a
12 truck and they're driving through areas that are a
13 hundred degrees Fahrenheit . So you -- you don't
14 want to lose moisture from your product .
15 So we were looking at the advisability
16 of raising or lowering, or doing whatever, with
17 the humectants . And, of course, one of the things
18 .that happens, if you increase the humectants
19 level, and more of humectant gets into the smoke
20 and the humectant turns out as part of the -- what
21 you weigh as total particulate matter and ends up
22 as being in the calculation, the FTC tar -- part
23 of the FTC tar number, then what happens is, as
24 you increase the humectants from, say, three to
• 25 four to five to six percent, the nicotine level in

Vol . 5, Pg . 791
1 the smoke goes down . That was just an observation
2 we made, that you could control nicotine by the
3 use of various levels of humectants .
4 But the primary purpose of -- oh, I
5 think at one time we increased the level of
6 humectants . It was not to lower the nicotine, but
7 it was primarily to make sure our products retain
8 their moisture for a longer period of time .
9 Because what happens, if you lose moisture from
10 the cigarette and the moisture loss is -- gets --
11 gets over a percent or two, that is it drops, say,
12 from 12 to 11 to 10, the tar level goes up and the
13 nicotine level in smoke goes up . And it gets to a
14 point where the smoke is very irritating .
15 Q. Did RJR do studies to determine
16 whether or not the tar levels could be reduced,
17 independent of reduction of the nicotine levels?
18 A . Well, here -- let me go back, 1980 . In 1980
19 there was a conference on less hazardous
20 cigarettes, called the Banbury Conference, and
21 Dr . Russell from England gave a presentation
22 there . And one of his theses, which he had
23 proposed sometime in the '70s, I forget the exact
24 date -- M .A .H . Russell is his name . He, in
25 England, and a man called, I believe, Jarvik,

Vol . 5, Pg . 792
1 J-A-R-V-I-K, in this country, proposed that the
2 safer cigarette should encompass lowering the tar
3 and leaving the nicotine alone, or lowering the
4 tar and raising the nicotine . And we looked at
5 that, and there was problems with it about -- when
6 you got an imbalance in the tar to nicotine ratio,
7 the cigarette became very harsh and the consumer
8 said no, no, no .
9 VIDEOGRAPHER : Mr . Maistros, we have
10 five minutes left on the videotape .
11 THE WITNESS : Well, if you gentlemen
12 don't mind, I'd like a break .
13 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going off the
14 record at 10 :51 a .m .
16 a .m . )
19 going back on the record at 11 :07 a .m .
21 Q. Dr . Rodgman, so I'm clear on this,
22 when you were talking about Philip Morris'
23 addition of ammonia to the reconstituted tobacco
24 sheet, was it your understanding, or is it your
25 understanding, that the only purpose in doing that

Vol . 5, Pg 793
1 was to make the sheet easier to work with?
2 A . That was in the patent .
3 Q . Did you ever have any information that
4 there was another purpose behind adding ammonia to
5 the tobacco?
6 A . I didn't .
7 Q . Did anyone at Reynolds?
8 A . Not that I know of .
9 Q . And when you left, was Reynolds adding
10 tobacco to its sheets -- I'm sorry, adding ammonia
11 to its reconstituted tobacco sheets?
12 A . Not all of it . They had two variations of
13 reconstituted tobacco sheet, and I'm sure you've
14 heard of them . One's G7, the one that was
15 invented in nineteen fifty -- first used in '54 ;
16 and G7A, which was the ammoniated one . And I
17 don't know how much they used of either .
18 Q . Do you know what years G7A was used?
19 A . No, I don't .
20 Q . And do you know what the purpose of
21 Reynolds adding ammonia to the reconstituted
22 tobacco process was?

Ln
23 A . I believe they were thinking, well does this ~
~
m
24 have anything to do with the acceptability and ,p
m
m
25 sudden surge in the sales of Marlboro? Was it W

Vol . 5, Pg . 794
something that the consumer liked? And they were
seeing, I guess, if they could match it .
That's a speculation on my part .
Q . You don't know of any research that
was done to determine if the ammonia being added
to the reconstituted tobacco sheet affected the
amount of nicotine yield of the tobacco?
A. No . The only thing I know, sir, is that --
and, here, I'm not an expert on nicotine ; I think
10 you're quite aware of that .
11 With every case I've seen that --
12 where you add ammonia or ammonium salt or ammonia
13 solution to a tobacco, you end up with less
14 nicotine in that tobacco than you started with .
15 Q . How about free nicotine? Do you know
16 what the concept of free nicotine is?
17 A . Yes . And I think, if you read the deposition
18 that went on here two weeks ago, three weeks ago,
19 you'll get a good idea of my view on free
20 nicotine .
21 Q . Does anyone share your view in the
22 chemical world?
23 A. Yes .
24 Q. Who?
. 25 A . That the free nicotine is a calculated

Vol . 5, Pg . 795
1 number?
2 Q . Okay, we can start there . Who shares
3 your view that the free nicotine is a calculated
4 number?
5 A . I think everybody realizes it's a calculated
6 number . As far as I know, there's no chemist that
7 has ever isolated -- identified free nicotine in
8 mainstream cigarette smoke .
9 Q . Was the -- to your knowledge, the
10 primary purpose Reynolds added ammonia to the
11 reconstituted tobacco was to attempt to duplicate
12 Marlboro?
13 A . That was my understanding .
14 Q . Is it your understanding that the
15 only -- only manner in which ammonia is added in
16 the manufacturing process is in this reconstituted
17 tobacco process?
18 A . I have no idea if it's added any other way .
19 And you've got to remember, too, up until 1980,
20 the R & D part of Reynolds was R & D . And there
21 were a lot of things went on in development
22 that -- where I was in research, that I had very
23 peripheral knowledge of . I was aware of some
24 things going on, but had no basis of knowledge of
25 the reasons for it or the reasons not to do things

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 796
1 or to do things .
2 And then, as I said before, in 1980,
3 research and development was split into six parts,
4 and the process engineering and applied work was
5 entirely separate from my work in fundamental .
6 And I had enough to do with fund -- directing
7 fundamental research, that -- to be worried about
8 what other people were doing . And --
9 Q. Between 1953 and 1980, did R -- R & D
10 do any research on nicotine?
11 A . I wasn't there in '53 .
12 Q . I'm sorry . What year did you join?
13 A. 1954 .
14 Q . Between 1954 and 1980, did R & D do
15 any research in nicotine?
16 MR . MaDERMOTT : Object to the form of
17 the question .
18 THE WITNESS : Yes .
20 Q . What research?
21 A . In the late 'SOs, two men at Reynolds -- well
22 one was actually a manager, the other was a lab

Ln
f-~
23 chemist, Dr . Markunas and Mr . Robert H . Cundiff ~
~
~
24 developed a -- an improved analysis of nicotine in',P .
rn
N
N
25 tobacco and cigarette smoke that became used by

Vol . 5, Pg . 797
1
1 almost every tobacco company in the world . It
2 took several years' research to develop that
3 process .
4 In fact, it was one of the reasons
5 that his development of a variety of analytical
6 methods for tobacco and tobacco smoke, which
7 included nicotine, nornicotine, and so on, that
8 Mr . Cundiff was awarded the -- a very prestigious
9 prize for his work in analytical chemistry .
10 Q . What other research?
11 A . In 1960, Benjamin Van Duuren and his
12 colleagues reported the identification of three
13 polycyclic aza-arenes, A-Z-A, hyphen, A-R-E-N-E-S,
14 in cigarette smoke . And these are -- have been
15 reported to be tumorigenic to mouse skin . And
16 Dr . Van Duuren studied nicotine pyrolysis to see
17 if these compounds arose from nicotine during
18 heating . And he said that they were, the three of
19 them .
20 However, we looked at the pyrolysis of
21 nicotine and couldn't find these three compounds .
22 And subsequent to 1960, from 1963 to 1992,
23 seven -- eight different studies had been
24 conducted and published, including some by
25 Dietrich Hoffmann and some from the U .S .

Vol . 5, Pg . 798
1 Government . But nobody can reproduce those
2 findings of Benjamin Van Duuren, either with
3 respect to those compounds in smoke or the
4 pyrolysis of nicotine .
5 And the reason I mention it is these
6 compounds are listed by EPA and Wynder and
Hoffmann as being three significant tumorigens in
8 cigarette smoke ; and for '63 to '92, in eight
9 different studies, in three different countries,
10 nobody can find them .
11 Q . And what -- what work were you doing
12 that would have piqued your interest to look,
13 after '87, at whether nicotine promotes tumors?
14 A . After '87? I wasn't there in '87 .
15 Q . What -- why are you still researching
16 what reports are out there on nicotine and its
17 potential tumor causing effects between '87 and
18 '92? Just as a --
19 A . Who?
20 Q . You .
21 A . I was reading the literature, see .
22 Q . After '87, when you left Reynolds, you
23 still kept up on the scientific literature of
24 tobacco?
25 A . Tobacco smoke .

Vol . 5, Pg . 799
1 Q. Were there any cases, litigation or
S 2 legal matters that you were consulting on, between
3 '87 and the present, that you haven't testified
4 about?
5 A . Not that I -- not that I know of .
6 Q• And going back to my original
7 question . Were you aware that Reynolds was doing
8 studies subsequent to Van Buren's (sic) study to
9 determine --
10 A . Van Duuren .
11 Q . Van Duuren's study, to determine if
12 his results could be duplicated?
• 13
14
A . No . When we couldn't find it in the nicotine
pyrolysis, we went on to other things .
15 Q . Did, to your knowledge, Reynolds ever
16 do any research to determine if nicotine promoted
17 tumors, caused tumors, was tumorigenic?
18 A. No .
19 Q . Are you aware of any other research
20 that was done at -- in R & D between '54 and '87
21 with respect to nicotine?

Ln
22 A . Well, I'm not really aware of any research . ~
~
a
23 When I came to Reynolds in 1954, I was shown a
~
m
24 facility that was not too far from here - it's w
25 gone now - where Reynolds recovered nicotine from

Vol . 5, Pg . 800
scrap tobacco and stems, and this was before the
days when -- in the manufacture -- preparation of
reconstituted tobacco sheet, Reynolds didn't use
all its stems . And they used part of the stems in
this facility ; they would treat it with alkali and
distill off the nicotine and sell the nicotine to
the company that made -- I'm thinking Black Leaf
40, which people use it on their rose bushes .
Q . A bug killer?
10 A . Bug killer .
11 Q . Do you know during what period of time
12 Reynolds continued to sell nicotine to that
13 company?
14 A . I -- I don't know when it quit or -- or it
15 was probably before -- maybe 1960 they quit . It
16 was probably earlier . Because, as their increased
17 use of the stems occurred, there was less and less
18 stems to process .
19 Q . If R & D wasn't doing nicotine
20 research, what entity within Reynolds would have
21 been? vn
N
v
22 A . If it wasn't done in R & D, I don't know m
bN
23 where it would have been done . rn

N
rn
24 Q . But when --
25 A . There was some work done -- now that I think

Vol . 5, Pg . 801
about it, it wasn't done at Reynolds, it was done
• at Bowman Gray School of Medicine . And it was the
first use of the radial-labeled nicotine to see
what happened to nicotine in a mammalian body .
I'm not too familiar with the work,
but it was done by a man called Dr . Wolff,
W-O-L-F-F . And the results were presented at
several of the earlier Tobacco Chemists
Conference, and which the first one, I believe,
10 was 1947 . And he presented several papers over
11 the years, between '47 and early '50s . I've seen
12 abstracts, but I didn't hear the papers .
13 Q . What is the largest particulate
14 compound that's contained in the cigarette smoke?
15 A . Largest particulate?
16 Q . Yes .
17 A . How do you mean "large"?
18 Q . Greatest quantity .
19 A. Water .
20 Q . And what about after water?
21 A . Nicotine .
22 Q . And between 1954 and 1987, is it your
23 testimony that there were no studies, other than
24 those you've testified about, with respect to how
25 nicotine interacts with the human body?

Vol . 5, Pg . 802
1 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection ; no
2 foundation .
3 THE WITNESS : Well we didn't have any
4 biological facilities, you know, '65, '66, '67, in
5 there . So as far as I know, no .
7 Q . And Reynolds, to your knowledge, other
8 than the Bowman Gray study you just mentioned, did
9 not contract with any outside agencies to
10 determine how nicotine interacted with the human
11 body?
13 foundation .
14 THE WITNESS : I don't know .
16 Q . Are you aware of any work that
17 Reynolds did to determine if nicotine had an
18 effect on the central nervous system of humans?
19 A . No .
20 Q . Did you prepare any literature,
21 reports, memorandum, that addressed the role
22 nicotine plays in tobacco smoke?
23 A . Not specifically on nicotine . I may have
24 mentioned nicotine . But not a report devoted to
25 the effect of nicotine during smoking, that I can

Vol . 5, Pg . 803
1 recall .
2 Q . As you sit here today, do you know
3 what role nicotine plays on the smoking process?
4 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form of
5 the question . Vague .
6 THE WITNESS : Say that again, sir .
8 Q . Do you know what effect or what role
9 nicotine plays on the smoking process?
10 MR . McDERMOTT : Same objection .
11 THE WITNESS : On the smoking process?
13 Q . I don't want to limit it to tobacco,
14 smoke, smoking process ; so I use "the smoking
15 process" as a catchall phrase .
16 A . Well, the smoking process is the process
17 whereby tobacco is converted to smoke and
18 nicotine -- some nicotine is transferred to --
19 from the cigarette to the mainstream smoke, and
20 some is transferred to the sidestream smoke, and
21 some is decomposed . That's the role of nicotine
22 in the smoking process .
23 Q . Do you know what role nicotine plays
24 insofar as interaction with the human body is
25 concerned?

Vol . 5, Pg . 804
1 A . I have no idea how nicotine works in the
2 human body . You're way outside my area of
3 expertise, sir .
4 Q . Who was the most knowledgeable person
5 at Reynolds between '54 and '87, with respect to
6 the role nicotine plays in the smoking process?
7 A. John H . Robinson .
8 Q . Was he within research and
9 development?
10 A . He came to research and development -- the
11 research department about 1978, '77, somewhere in
12 there .
13 Q . And you eventually were director of
14 research and development?
15 A . I hired John Robinson . I was director of
16 research, sir . I heard somebody saying something
17 on the phone that I was the grand guru of all
18 R & D, and I wish you'd get it straight .
19 Q . When you were director of research,
20 you were John Robinson's supervisor?
21 A . I was -- well, I was director of research,
22 and John Robinson's manager was John Reynolds, who
23 reported to me .
24 Q . And were you copied on the reports
25 that Robinson was preparing, insofar as he was

Vol . 5, Pg . 805
1 doing research on nicotine?
2 A . Yes . Well, his first work in -- first couple
3 of years he was there, he wasn't particularly
4 working on nicotine per se . The -- one of the
5 large projects he was working on was the Barclay
6 problem, which lasted for a year and a half .
7 Someplace in 1981 it was all finished ; they turned
8 over the information to the Federal Trade
9 Commission .
10 Q . Did you review Dr . Robinson's work on
11 nicotine?
12 A . I can't remember whether he did very much
• 13
14
nicotine work while I was director of research .
Q. Did Dr . Robinson have to obtain your
15 approval before commencing any research projects,
16 when you were director of research?
17 A . Well, it was usually done through the
18 manager, from Dr . Reynolds .
19 Q . Have you written any papers,
20 memorandums, research reports that address the
21 contentions made by some people out there that
22 Reynolds and other tobacco companies manipulate or
23 control the level of nicotine?
24 MS . EASON : Object to the form .
• 25 THE WITNESS : Would you say that

Vol . 5, Pg . 806
1 again, sir .
3 Q . Are you aware there's allegations
4 floating out there that tobacco companies,
5 including Reynolds, manipulates and controls the
6 level of nicotine in its tobacco products?
7 A . I'm aware there -- that's been said .
8 Q . Have you ever written any papers,
9 documents, memorandum that address that issue?
10 A. No . I think most of the manipulation thing
11 came up after I retired .
12 MS . KNISELY : May we go off the
13 record, please?
15 record at 11 :28 a .m . We're off the record .
17 a .m . )
18 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going back on the
19 record at 11 :44 a .m .
20 EXAMINATION
21 BY MR . SHELLER :
22 Q. Dr . Rodgman, my name is Steve Sheller
23 and I'm one of the counsel for the plaintiffs, and ~

J
H
24 I ' m go i ng to ask you some additional questions . ~

4~-
• 25 Mr . Maistros will be back asking you questions N

m

Vol . 5, Pg . 807
1 when I'm done with my portion of the deposition .
2 And hopefully it won't be too long .
3 In terms of the compounds that are in
4 tobacco smoke, the Cambridge filter system, which
5 is used by the Federal Trade Commission to measure
6 particulate matter in tobacco, you're familiar
7 with that?
8 A . Yes, I am .
9 Q . Okay . And that -- what does that
10 measure in terms of tobacco smoke? Just
11 particulate matter?
12 A . It -- the Cambridge filter pad was designed
13 that, when smoke impinges on it, it takes out
14 99 .9-something percent of the particulate matter
15 that strikes at the vapor phase gas components go
16 through .
17 Q . Now, you say, the vapor phase gas
18 components . Can you explain what the vapor phase
19 gas components are in generality? What -- what is
20 that, as distinguished from particulate?
21 A . Well --
22 Q . I-- I know we know, but this is for
23 the jury .
24 A . Okay . Cigarette smoke is, of course, an
0 25 aerosol . It's little liquid droplets, balls,

Vol . 5, Pg . 808
1 little liquid balls, spheres, whatever you want to
2 call them, suspended in a vapor . And when you
3 pull smoke through the cigarette, it goes through
4 the cigarette, tobacco rod, and the filter . And
5 then, if you're collecting the smoke on a
6 Cambridge filter pad, like in the FTC procedure,
7 the particulate matter impinges on the Cambridge
8 filter pad and it stays there . The vapor phase
9 components continue on through and are expelled,
10 unless you're specifically studying those .
11 And if you look at the particulate
12 phase of cigarette smoke versus vapor phase, what
13 happens is, obviously, when you're smoking -- take
14 a puff on the cigarette, you're pulling air
15 through the lit end . So what goes through the
16 Cambridge filter pad, the vapor phase components
17 of course is : The nitrogen that was in the air,
18 it doesn't burn, or very little of it does ; the
19 unconsumed oxygen ; plus carbon monoxide, carbon
20 dioxide, helium that was in the air, acetaldehyde,
21 formaldehyde .
Ln
~
22 There are probably four or five J
F-+
m
23 hundred components in the vapor phase that go ~
ON
N
24 through the -- ~
i 25 Q . That go through the filter?

Vol . 5, Pg . 809
1 A . Right . And, fortunately, every -- almost
2 everything in the vapor phase is known .
3 Now, if you look at the vapor phase
4 versus the particulate phase, in a normal
5 cigarette, with nine-tenths of a gram of tobacco
6 or so, the vapor phase -- well, the total smoke,
7 counting what impinges on the -- stays on the
8 Cambridge filter pad and what goes through it, is
9 roughly 500 milligrams . And if the particulate
10 matter is a 20-milligram -- well, say,
11 20-milligram TPM cigarette --
12 Q . Tar per --
0 13 A . Four hundred -- 480 is gas phase, of which
14 probably -- nearly 400 milligrams is unused air .
15 Q . Okay . So -- let -- let me understand .
16 The -- there's 500 milligrams --
17 A . Uh-huh .
18 Q . -- approximately, that goes through
19 the Cambridge filter .
20 A . Well, no . The total smoke generated from a
21 cigarette in ten puffs or eight puffs, whatever it
22 takes, would be about 500 milligrams . Twenty
23 milligrams of total particulate matter,
24 480 milligrams of vapor phase components, of which
25 about 400 is air .

Vol . 5, Pg . 810
1 Q . So there's about 80 milligrams of
2 something in the vapor?
3 A . Yeah . Well, if you have a TPM of 20, you
4 could take a rough guess that your carbon monoxide
5 will be 20, plus or minus one milligram .
6 Q. Okay . But let -- let me kind of get
7 these numbers straight . And I was not good in
8 chemistry . I want you to understand that .
9 A . Uh-huh . I'm just giving you approximations .
10 Q . No . No, I understand . So, I'm going
11 to go very --
12 A . Let's say, take a 20-milligram TPM cigarette .
13 Q . That's a tar per milligram .
14 A . No .
15 Q . What does TPM stand for?
16 A . Total particulate matter .
17 Q. Matter . Total particulate matter .
18 A . Okay .
19 S2 • So 20 milligram total particulate
20 matter .
21 A . Right . Okay .
22 And -- and then, if you're speaking
23 about the non-air components that go through the
24 filter pad, like acetaldehyde, and so on and so
25 forth, then the ones that are the most plentiful

Vol . 5, Pg . 811
)
1 are carbon monoxide ; which, as a rule of thumb, if
2 you know the TPM, the carbon monoxide will
3 probably -- that number, plus or minus one or two
4 milligrams, so you're looking 18 to 22 . The
5 carbon dioxide, as a rule of thumb, will be about
6 twice that, two and a half times that . And those
7 are the most plentiful components in the vapor
8 phase .
9 And of course you have acetaldehyde,
10 and so on and so forth . And then you --
11 Q . Okay . Let me -- let me -- so the
12 vapor phase consists of -- let me get this
13 straight . You've got 500 --
14 A . Total smoke matter .
15 Q . Total smoke matter .
16 A . Right .
17 Q . TSM I'm going to call that .
18 A . Okay .
19 Q . Then of that 520 --
20 A . Say -- let's say 20 .
21 Q . Approximately 20 .
22 A . Twenty would be TPM .
23 Q . That's what gets onto the filter?
24 A . The Cambridge filter, right .
25 Q . Then there's 480 left .

Vol . 5, Pg . 812
(
1 A . Right .
2 Q . Approximately .
3 A. Ri g ht .
4 Q . And of that 480, 400 is air?
5 A. Roughly .
6 Q . Roughly four --
7 A. Nitrogen, and oxygen, and helium, and
8 whatever, krypton .
9 Q . I thought that's Superman .
10 So 80, I'll say, is stuff?
11 A. Right . And of that 80, probably half of it
12 is C02, carbon dioxide .
13 Q . Right . So let me write this down .
14 Forty equals -- of 80, 40 equals C02 --
15 A . Two --
16 Q . Which is carbon -
17 A . Dioxide .
18 Q. -- dioxide .
19 A. Carbon monoxide would be the same as the TPM,
20 about 20 .
21 Q . Twenty . And what's the other 20?
22 A. Well, you've got -- probably the next highest

Ln
F-
23 component in the vapor phase is acetaldehyde, ~
m
24 which is about one milligram . Then everything 4~*
rn
N
CO
! 251 after that goes down, milligrams -

Vol . 5, Pg . 813
Q . Is that where they talk about benzines
and all those other things that --
A . Yeah, they're way down there, in micrograms
and nanograms, and so on and so forth .
Q . Okay . Now --
A . And in that 80, it -- rough -- roughly 80
that we said were non-air components, there are
about four or 500 compounds -- 400 compounds that
have been identified .
10 Q. Now, if I wanted to make a cigarette
11 to reduce the tar per milligram at that 20 that's
12 collected on the Cambridge pad --
13 A . Right . Right .
14 Q . -- could I vaporize some of those
15 things and get them out of there?
17 the question .
19 question .
20 MR . BLANCATO : Object to the form of
21 the question . ~
~
-3
22 THE WITNESS : I don't quite ~
m
23 understand -- you mean -- ~

N
0
9 25 Q . Well, I want to turn it -- I want to

Vol . 5, Pg . 814
1 lower -- I want to have less gook . I want to get
2 it out of the gook stage and turn it into the air
3 stage, the vapor stage .
6 the question .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
8 Q . How would I do that? Could I vaporize
9 it, could I do something to it to -- to do that?
10 A . Well the best way is to have the cigarette
11 burn differently .
12 Q. Okay .
13 A . And you could do that by air diluting filter .
14 And if you -- there's a mathematical correlation
15 between percentage air dilution as imposed by
16 filter tip ventilation and the particulate matter .
17 Because, what you're doing is -- normally, with a
18 normal cigarette, you would pull 35 milliliters of
19 air into it, according to the FTC procedure . If
20 you air dilute it ten percent through the little
21 holes in the filter, then ten percent of the air,
22 which would be three and a half milliliters of
23 air, would come through the little holes ; and then
24 the remainder, 31 and a half milligrams, would
25 come through the cigarette . Which means that you

Vol . 5, Pg . 815
1 would form less material that would impinge on the
2 Cambridge filter pad .
3 Now, if you went to 20 percent,
4 then - -
5 Q . Well, would that material go into the
6 air? Where would it go?
7 A. What?
8 Q . The less -- material that didn't get
9 on the Cambridge filter .
10 A . It's because -- no . It's because you didn't
11 generate it .
12 Q . You didn't -- it didn't get generated .
13 A . Right .
14 Q . Okay . Now, is there any way to
15 generate it, but turn it into vapor?
16 A . Uh --
18 the question .
19 Generate what?
21 Q . In the four -- the 500 --
22 A . Well, you see, sir, the -- the --
23 Q . The 400 air stuff that you take
24 through the filter, that the filter doesn't
_ 25 pick up, which includes the 80 --

Vol . 5, Pg . 816
1 A . Right .
2 Q . -- 80 milligrams that we talked
3 about .
4 A . No, what would -- you would have to do
5 MR . MoDERMOTT : Let me just --
6 I object -
7 MR . SHELLER : Please let me ask a
8 question .
9 MR . McDERMOTT : Yes -- I object to the
10 form of the question . It is vapor already . So
11 your question is : How do you turn the vapor into
12 vapor?
13 MR . SHELLER : No . No, we're talking
• 14 about the 20 part TPM .
15 THE WITNESS : Okay . Okay .
16 MR . MCDERMOTT : Well, then, will
17 you --
19 Q . I'm -- I'm -- I'm designing a
20 cigarette that I want'to know -- you're -- you're
21 a cigarette engineer, right? Design --
22 A . No . I'm an organic chemist .
23 Q . An organic chemist . All right .
24 So you -- well, I'm asking you, as an
25 organic chemist -- and I did take organic

Vol . 5, Pg . 817
1 chemistry ; that was one of the few chemistry
2 courses I took . But if I wanted a --
3 A . You've got to -- let -- let me back up, if
4 you want to learn about what's on the Cambridge
5 filter pad .
6 What's on the Cambridge filter pad are
7 things that are relatively non-volatile when they
8 hit that Cambridge filter pad .
9 Q . All right .
10 A . Now, things like acetaldehyde, formaldehyde,
11 air, components, nitrog -- they are gaseous or
12 vaporous ; they go through .
13 Now, because the particles, these
14 little balls, are whizzing down the cigarette,
15 they hit the Cambridge filter pad, and the
16 Cambridge filter pad is designed to stop
17 everything above a certain size . Well, above a
18 certain size is almost everything that is-not
19 little molecules like the air . So they hit the
20 Cambridge filter pad and are impinged there .
21 Now, what's in that 20 milligrams is
22 all the things that are non-volatile at the ~

_j
23 temperature that they impinge, which usually is 30 m
~
24 or 40 degrees, a little above room temperature -- W
w
251 all right . I mean, let's get to the point .

Vol . 5, Pg . 818
1 Benzpyrene does not vaporize at room
2 temperature or 40 degrees . You -- to vaporize
3 benzpyrene, you got to get it to 350 degrees
4 centigrade . So, theirs stick there now . You
5 cannot -- there's no way you can vaporize
6 benzpyrene, for example, or -- to get it to go
7 through as a vapor at 30, 40 degrees . So it's
8 going to impinge .
9 What you do, you control the design of
10 the cigarette so what comes through and hits that
11 pad is less . And you can do that by what you put
12 it -- how you design your filter tip, how you
13 design the -- use expanded tobacco or
14 reconstituted sheet . And -- and, of course, if
15 you look at the FTC -- well not FTC, the
16 sales-weighted average for tar, from 1955 to the
17 present time, it's been dropping .
18 Q . Well, I understand that . But what I'm
19 trying to understand is -- let's -- let's talk
20 about benzpyrene, for example . Is that in the
21 TPM?
22 A . Uh-huh .
23 Q . That -- that never gets vaporized .
24 A . No .
25 Q . The cigarette doesn't burn at a high

Vol . 5, Pg . 81 9
1 enough -
2 A . And by the way, I'm sure you may b e
3 heading for -- because you cannot find nicotine in
4 the vapor phase of a cigarette ; it's on the pad .
5 Q . Right .
6 A . So, therefore, it's not --
7 Q- Your view -- now, benzpyrene -- wha t
8 deg -- can only vaporize at how many degree s
9 temperature?
10 A . What --
11 Q . 350 degrees ?
12 A . Yeah . You have to get it above its melting
13 point . And it melts --
14 Q . Right . And cigarettes never burn at
15 350 degrees ?
16 A . Well, yeah, the burning temperature of a
17 cigarette, out of the fire cone, is 850 degrees
18 centigrade .
19 Q . 850 . Well, wouldn't some of that
20 benzpyrene then be vaporized ?
21 A . Well, it's not formed at the 850 degree
22 temperature . It's formed back in the cigarette,
23 where the temperature is lower . And the thing is,
24 the benzpyrene, because of its nature, gets into
25 the particle .

Vol . 5, Pg . 820
1 Q . Well -- well I understand that . But
2 suppose, now -- I'm being very simple here . I'm
3 at the end of my cigarette butt and it's -- the
4 burn is down at the bottom near the filter . Are
5 you -- you telling me that none of that benzpyrene
6 is vaporized?
7 A . It's probably vaporized during the
8 formation -- during its formation . Benzpyrene
9 isn't in tobacco .
10 Q . I know, during the formation . And
11 you're saying none of that benzpyrene is going to
12 get through that filter, according to you?
13 A . No .
14 Q . Okay .
15 And you're saying, you don't know
16 any way to vaporize that tar per milligram, that
17 20 that the pad gets, that -- now, I want to make
18 a cigarette that I want -- what -- what's in that
19 tar per milligram? You got benzpyrene --
20 MS . EASON : Objection .
21 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . Total

Ln
22 particulate matter .
24 Q . Total particulate matter .
25 A . Total particulate matter --

Vol . 5, Pg . 821
1 Q . I'm sorry . I used TPM before .
2 A . -- there are 4400 known components --
Q . What are the major ones? Nicotine?
4 A . Nicotine, water .
5 Q . Which -- is nicotine, the ma -- that's
6 the most --
7 A . Water . Water .
8 Q . Water is the main thing? So --
9 A . Nicotine .
10 Q . Then after that? What's the next big
11 ones?
12 A . The saturated aliphatic hydrocarbons ; which
13 is a series of about 80 compounds, but they act as
14 if they were one .
15 Q . I see .
16 A . And they probably represent a fair -- let me
17 correct one thing .
18 Well, the third one I would put down
19 would be the humectants, glycerin and propylene
20 glycol .
21 Q. Okay . Now, let me ask you something .
22 The water -- how much of the 20 TPM is water?
23 A . About eight percent .
24 Q . And how much is nicotine?
25 A . Six or seven, depending on the cigarette .

Vol . 5, Pg . 822
1 Q . I see . And how much is whatever that
2 word was?
3 A . Humectants?
4 Q . No, the one be -- poly --
5 A . Oh, the saturated aliphatic hydrocarbons?
6 Q . Yes .
7 A . Probably three or four percent .
8 Q . And then humectants?
9 A . And, see, that will be dependent on the
10 tobacco, because those are in tobacco .
11 Q. Uh-huh . What are humectants?
12 A . The glycerin and propylene glycol are used to
13 help the cigarette retain its moisture during its
14 transport from manufacture to the consumer, and
15 across the country, and so on .
16 Q . What's the usual amount, approximate?
17 A . In smoke? Probably a couple of a percent .
18 Two percent .
19 Q . All right .
20 Now, is there any way, that you know
21 of, that nicotine can get vaporized so it doesn't
22 get counted on that pad?
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form of Ln
24 the question .

Vol . 5, Pg . 823
Q . As TPM .
2 A . No, I do not know .
3 Q . Do you know whether ammonia vaporizes?
4 A . Ammonia is in the gas phase of smoke .
5 Q. Right . But does ammonia free the
6 nicotine from the salt? The TPM?
7 A . As far as I know, no .
8 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to form .
BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . What is that calculated amount of
11 nicotine you were talking about in the prior
12 deposition in Ju -- I think it was in July or
13 June? What is that? Is that an amount that
14 people calculate as in the vapor?
15 A. No . They -- as I say, it's a funny
16 calculation . It's based on the pH of the smoke .
17 And I say, as far as I know, nobody has ever found
18 free nicotine that went through that filter --
20 Q . But they -- but they calculate that --
21 that there is some amount going through there,
22 right, because of the ammonia ; isn't that true?
24 the question .
25 THE WITNESS : No . They calculate

Vol . 5, Pg . 824
)
1 that -- in the smoke that you take in there may be
• 2 free nicotine, according to that calculation .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
4 Q. Right . That's not on -- that doesn't
5 get picked up on the pad, right?
6 A . Well, it gets picked up on the pad 'cause
7 none goes through, sir .
8 Q. Well --
9 A . You don't smoke a cigarette through a
11 Q . I understand .
12 A . Personally .
13 Q . Are you saying that the Cambridge
14 filter pad picks up all the nicotine that's in the
15 smoke?
16 A . Yes .
17 Q. Okay . And you're positive of that?
18 A . I have never seen a report where somebody has
19 reported nicotine, per se, in the vapor phase of
20 the mainstream smoke .
21 Q . But people believe that nicotine is in
22 the vapor phase because of ammonia, don't they? Ln
23 Many scientists .
24 A . No, they don't .
25 Q . They don't . Where do they believe it

Vol . 5, Pg . 825
1 is? They believe it's not in the vapor phase?
2 A . No, they don't believe it -- I think you're
3 missing the point about this calculation with free
4 nicotine and nicotine in the vapor phase .
5 Q. Uh-huh . Right .
6 A . If nicotine is free and in the vapor phase,
7 it will go through the Cambridge filter pad .
8 Q. Right .
9 A . But none does, so it can't be in the -- can't
10 be f ree .
11 Q . So you're saying, if nicotine is free,
12 it will be in the --
13 A . Vapor phase .
14 Q . -- vapor phase and not counted in the
15 filter . But you're saying, to your knowledge,
16 none is in that vapor phase, right?
17 A . Right .
18 Q . So you don't agree with those who
19 believe that a substantial amount of nicotine is
20 in the vapor phase . You disagree with that view .
21 A . I keep telling you, sir, that nobody has been
22 able to measure it .
23 Q . I understand that . But that's --
24 because no one has measured it, you're saying it's
25 not there . Right?

Vol . 5, Pg . 826
1 A . It's not in the vapor phase that goes through
0 21 the filter pad .
3 Q . Now, has Reynolds ever tried to
4 measure it?
5 A . Yes .
6 Q . When?
7 A . Oh, I forget when .
8 Q . When you were there?
9 A . Yeah . When I was there . I wasn't involved
10 in it .
11 Q . Who was?
12 A . Somebody in analytical .
13 Q . Who was that?
14 A . Probably somebody like Patrick Cooper,
15 who .
16 Q . And did you ever see a report from
17 Patrick Cooper, saying : I tried to measure the

,
18 nicotine and -- to see if it's in the vapor phase,
19 and I tried and tried and tried and couldn't do
20 it?
21 A. No . There are reports in the literature by
22 other people that have done it and have tried it
23 and tried it .
24 Q . Now, you do use ammonia to free the
25 nicotine from the tobacco stems . You did that

Vol . 5, Pg . 827
1 back in the '60s . Remember, you said that? How
2 does that work?
3 A . I didn't say I used ammonia to --
5 the question .
6 THE WITNESS : -- free tobacco from the
7 stems .
8 BY MR . SHELLER :
9 Q . Not tobacco, nicotine .
10 A . Nicotine from the stems .
11 Q. Well, remember, you were talking about
12 selling the nicotine
13 A . I didn't say I used ammon -- they used
14 ammonia . They didn't use ammonia .
15 Q . They didn't . What did they use?
16 A . Sodium hydroxide .
17 Q . Sodium hydroxide . Well, I thought you
18 said somewheres that they used ammonia, before, to
19 free -- to get nicotine out .
20 A . That was the denicotinization process .
21 Q. Okay . And how did ammonia take out
22 the nicotine in the denicotinization process?
23 A . Well, ammonia is more basic than nicotine,
24 and nicotine is present in tobacco as a salt . And
25 it --

Vol . 5, Pg . 828
Q . But --
A . -- frees the nicotine, which temperature
drives off, and it's burned or collected or
whatever .
Q . It frees the nicotine into a
collectible air which is then -- what -- how does
it get back into a fluid or a salt?
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . Once it's freed by the ammonia .
11 A . Well, in that case, it's -- there's enough
12 ammonia there to keep it going, to keep it as free
13 nicotine .
• 14 Q . I see .
15 A . There's nothing else there, like the smoke
16 particles, to get the nicotine --
17 Q . What does it look like? Have you ever
18 seen it?
19 A . What?
20 Q . The free nicotine in --
21 A . Nicotine -- yeah, I've seen free nicotine .
22 Q . What does it look like?
23 A . Water .
24 Q . Water . Is it wet?
25 A . I wouldn't advise putting your finger in it .

Vol . 5, Pg . 829
Okay .
Now, if that -- and you've never done
any -- to your knowledge, no one's ever tried to
heat that water to see if it vaporizes?
A . Heat what water?
MR . MCDERMOTT : Excuse me . What
water?
8 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . The nicotine water, that looks like
10 water .
11 A . Nicotine vaporizes .
12 Q . Hmmm?
13 A . Nicotine will vap -- you can boil nicotine -
14 Q . It will vapor --
15 A . -- and it boils like water, and it gives off
16 an equivalent of steam .
17 Q . Right . So you don't know whether
18 Reynolds has ever tested the product to see if
19 in the cigarettes the vapor that -- the nicotine
20 that's freed is vaporized?
21 MR . MaDERMOTT : Object to the form .
23 Q . And gets through that Cambridge
24 filter?
251 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection, asked and

Vol . 5, Pg . 830
1 answered .
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
3 Q . You don't know .
4 To your knowledge, that's been tried
5 and they never found anything?
6 A . As I have said repeatedly, sir, no one has
7 found, either at Reynolds or elsewhere, free
8 nicotine passing through that Cambridge filter
9 pads from the mainstream smoke of the cigarette .
10 Q. Okay . Now, we talked about ammonia,
11 in terms of vapor -- can vaporize things,
12 nicotine, right? You agree it can vaporize it --
14 BY MR . SHELLERt
15 Q . -- if it's boiled?
16 A . You're wandering around . I can't follow you .
17 Q. Okay . Well, let me try another
18 question .
19 Is there anything else in the tar that
20 is freed by any additives --
21 MR . BLANCATO : Objection --
Ln
22 BY MR . SHELLER : ~
~
~
m
23 Q . -- similar to, for example, the way
~
m
~
24 nicotine is freed? m

Vol . 5, Pg . 831
MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the
question .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q• The TPM -- the total particulate
matter? I'm sorry about the tar .
A . Well, as far as I know -- you're talking
about freeing nicotine in the TPM . As far as I
know, there's no free nicotine been found in TPM .
Q . Well, how about in the cigarette? Is
10 there any -- it frees it from the salt?
11 A . As far as I know, there's no free nicotine in
12 tobacco .
13 Q . I see . So the ammonia does nothing to
14 the nicotine . It doesn't free it in the tobacco
15 in the cigarette, but it will free it in the
16 tobacco that you're going to sell for bug killer .
17 A . Pardon?
~
~
20 Q . It will free it in the tobacco that J
N
m
21 you're going to sell for bug killer? ~

m
~
J
22 MR . BLANCATO : Object to form .
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to form .
24 THE WITNESS : As I said, we didn't use
25 ammonia to make the -- free the nicotine for sale .

Vol . 5, Pg . 832
1 BY MR . SHELLER :
2 Q . Well, what did you do with the free
3 nicotine that you freed with the ammonia?
5 THE WITNESS : We burned it .
MR . MCDERMOTT : Ditto .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . You burned it?
9 Yeah .
10 Q . Why did you burn it?
11 A . What would we use it for?
12 Q . Bug killer .
13 A . Well, you got to remember, in one case you
14 had a controlled or contained system . It looked
15 like a large liquor still, where you cook the
16 stems with the alkali and the nicotine distilled
17 over, and you caught it in suitable vessels . But
18 this is being done in a huge belt . Nic -- tobacco
19 is going along a belt . And you're dealing with
20 great volumes of air and ammonia and nicotine .
21 it's either collected and disposed of, or actually
22 burnt at an outlet . Ln
N
23 Q . And has that always been the case, ~
S)
24 they were burning it, at Reynolds?
~
~
25 A . I don't -- I don't know whether they still do0D

Vol . 5, Pg . 833
it or not . There are probably rules against it
now .
Okay . When did -- when you'were
there, up to, what, 1987, did they always burn all
that nicotine?
A . Sir, I saw it done once on an orientation
tour, back in the early '60s, and that's the only
time I ever saw them do it .
Q . So you really don't know what happens
10 to that free nicotine --
11 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection to the form
12 of the question .
14 Q . -- after that . You have no personal
15 knowledge of what happened .
16 A . I have no personal knowledge what they did
17 after that one time I saw it ; I didn't know what
18 happened before that .
19 Q . Is there anything else that -- in the
20 processes you're familiar with, in the chemistry c„

N
~
21 that goes into cigarettes, that frees anything ~
m
0.
22 else besides the nicotine from tobacco? m
10.
ko
23 A . Well --
251 the question .

Vol . 5, Pg . 834
THE WITNESS : I think you may be
confused about something . You sound as if we
ammoniated every pound of tobacco we bought .
5 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . I didn't say that .
A . We only ammoniated the tobaccos -- we removed
the nicotine from tobaccos when the nicotine was
very high . Which, in some years, if the normal
10 crop or the crop that was going to be used were in
11 the range that we normally used, there was no
12 denicotinization . It was only those crops that
13 arose out of a situation where it was very hot,
14 very dry, and you ended up with a tobacco that was
15 six percent nicotine and you didn't want that .
16 Q. Right . There were two times ammonia
17 was used ; I think you already pointed that out .
18 One with -- is that G7A --
19 A . Right .
20 Q . -- product, which is actually put into
21 the cigarette, and then the other is the
22 denicotinization process you talked about .
23 A . Right .
24 Q . No, I understand that .
25 I'm talking about, is there anything

Vol . 5, Pg . 835
1 else, similar to ammonia, or does ammonia also
2 free any other salt-type thing like nicotine or
3 any other product in this tobacco?
4 MR . MoDERMOTT : Object to the form of
5 the question .
6 BY MR . SHELLER :
7 Q . To your knowledge .
8 A . You know, the -- tobacco contains several
9 compounds similar to nicotine, and there --
10 Q . What are they?
11 A . Nornicotine .
12 Q . Does it free that?
14 the question .
15 THE WITNESS : Well, I think you're
16 trying to trap me into this "free" business . it
17 will, if you're denicotinizing tobacco with
18 ammonia to reduce the nicotine, it will also
19 reduce the nornicotine, in the same way .
21 Q . Well, I want to know : I've got that

~
22 tar . And I'm trying to get out of the tar, free ~~
~
23 stuff from it, for whatever purpose . Is there ~
m
~
24 anything else that you know of, in the chemistry ~
251 that's used in Reynolds' products, that frees

Vol . 5, Pg . 836
1 anything other than the nicotine and the
2 nornicotine?
4 of the question .
5 MR . BLANCATO : Objection .
6 MS . EASON : Objection to the form .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
8 Q . From that tar .
9 I don't follow the question, sir .
10 Q . Well, let me -- what's . -- give me --
11 in the tar itself, what -- the main thing in the
12 tar, you said, is water, 80 percent . Let's take
13 the saturated, what do you call them, alo --
14 A . Aliphatic hydrocarbons?
15 Q . Yeah . Is there anything that can free
16 them?
17 A . They are free .
18 Q . They are free?
19 A . They are free .
20 Q . I see . So they're in the partic -- is
21 there anything that vaporizes them?

Ln
22 A . That's -- ~
~
~
m
23 Q . Hmmm? Is there anything that can
~
24 vaporize them? ~
N
25 A . Yeah .

Vol . 5, Pg . 837
Q. What?
A . That's how they get in the smoke .
Q. I see . Are all of them picked up by
the filter?
A . Yes -- well, I shouldn't say "all" of them .
There are saturated aliphatic -- aliphatic
hydrocarbons that are very low molecular weight,
like methane or ethane, and they go through in the
vapor phase . It's only when you get up to about
10 eight or ten carbons that they stick on the
11 filter . And it's a matter of molecular weight and
12 size .
13 Q . Well, if I wanted to design a
14 cigarette to reduce the amount of particulate
15 matter that gets on that filter and yet get the
16 smoker to take it in -- the smoke, get it into
17 that 480 milligrams of stuff that goes in the
18 smoke -- is that it, milligrams?
19 A . Uh-huh .
20 Q. How could I do it?
21 A . I don't understand --
23 the question .
24 THE WITNESS : I don't understand what
251 you mean .

Vol . 5, Pg . 838
1 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . I want to get around that filter .
Get what around the filter?
Q . I don't want the Cambridge filter
counting everything that I got in my cigarette .
How would I do it? You don't know how to do that?
MS . EASON : Objection to the form .
the question .
10 THE WITNESS : I -- I still don't get
11 what you mean .
13 Q . Well, let me make it a little simpler
14 for you .
15 If I turned ammonia into my cigarettes
16 and I had -- 6 to 7 percent of it was particulate
17 matter, but I was able to vaporize it, still get
18 it in -- in the body of a human being, and reduce
19 that 6 to 7 percent to 2 percent, wouldn't that
20 fool the .Cambridge filter? I'm being very clear
21 with you, not hiding anything, throwing it right
22 to you . Wouldn't it fool the Cambridge filter?
24 THE WITNESS : Which 6 or 7 percent are
25 you talking about, sir?

Vol . 5, Pg . 839
1 BY MR . SHELLER :
2 S2 • You told me a few minutes ago that 6
3 to 7 percent of the total particulate matter
4 picked up on the filter, the Cambridge filter, is
5 nicotine .
6 Right .
7 Q You said 3 to 4 percent is this other
8 thing I can never pronounce, and you said
9 8 percent is water . And then -- and isn't it true
10 that, if I'm able to vaporize a good portion of
11 that nicotine into -- it's not going to get on
12 that filter, right?
13 A . Right . But I say --
14 Q . Well, you're saying that you never
15 counted it .
16 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . Objection
17 let him answer .
18 THE WITNESS : No . I said that nobody
19 has been able to measure it .
21 Q. I see . Is there anything else that
22 can vaporize things that nobody's been able to
23 measure that was in that tar -- that particulate
24 matter?

Vol . 5, Pg . 840
the question .
THE WITNESS : Nornicotine .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . Nornicotine . How about anything else?
the question .
THE WITNESS : I can't think of
anything .
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . You're a chemist, now . You mean you
11 can't tell me anything that you could do to that
12 particulate matter that could vaporize --
A . I've told you -- I've told you how you
14 control the particulate matter . It doesn't --
15 Q . I understand what you told me . But
16 now --
19 Q . -- I want to design a cigarette that's
20 going to trick that filter .
21 A . Well, if you can design it, we'll be glad to
22 hear from you .
23 Q . I know you would . That's been
24 Reynolds' business, hasn't it?

Vol . 5, Pg . 841
1 the question .
MR . SHELLER : Does he have the
4 materials now that I asked to be copied?
5 MR . HOLTON : We have the first batch .
6 THE WITNESS : I think it's time for
7 lunch, isn't it?
8 MR . SHELLER : What time is it? Do you
9 want to take a break?
10 MS . EASON : It's after 12 :00 .
11 THE WITNESS : 12 :21 .
12 MR . SHELLER : Do you want to take a
13 break?
14 MR . BLANCATO : Sure .
16 record at 12 :19 p .m .
17 MR . McDERMOTT : I'd like to respond to
18 Mr . Sheller .
19 VIDEOGRAPHER : Do you want to stay on
20 the record?
21 MR . SHELLER : I don't want to let him
22 respond .
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Or we can do it when
24 we get back from lunch, either way .
• 25 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going off the

1
Vol . 5, Pg . 842
1 video record at 12 :19 p .m .
2 MR . SHELLER : Do it now . Get it done
3 with .
4 VIDEOGRAPHER : Do you want this on the
5 record?
6 MR . McDERMOTT : Yeah, I did want to
respond on the record . I just didn't want --
8 MR . SHELLER : Well, it doesn't have to
9 be on the -- does it have to be on the video?
10 MR . McDERMOTT : No, it doesn't have to
11 be on the video record, like we do it here .
12 VIDEOGRAPHER : So we're going off the
• 13
14
video record at 12 :19 p .m .
MR . McDERMOTT : And you can leave,
15 Alan . I wanted to respond very briefly to two
16 charges which were leveled at the beginning of the
17 deposition today . See if I can get my notes here
18 to make sure I copied them down .
19 Oh, first, that I was coaching
20 Mr . Blancato . I believe that was a reference to
21 my touching Mr . Blancato's arm at a point where

Ln
22 there were questions that first dealt with ~
~
~
23 Reynolds' attorney/client privilege, and I was m
~
m
24 anticipating questions dealing with Mr . Rodgman's Ln
CO
• 25 personal attorney/client privilege .

Vol . 5, Pg . 843
I view it as the obligation of every
lawyer to protect and preserve attorney/client
privilege . And to do otherwise is to bring the
profession into disrepute, which, I regret to say,
it, more and more, seems to deserve, in the
public's eye . I do not regard that as
interfering .
Which brings me to the second charge
that was hurled, and that is that I was somehow
10 interfering with the conduct of the deposition .
11 I invite Mr . Sheller to review the
12 transcript at his leisure and come up with any
13 instances in which I was interfering with this
14 deposition . As to the proposition that I was
15 interfering with the progress of the case in some
16 fashion by indicating my preference to
17 Mr . Blancato with respect to review by another law
18 clerk, we are parties to the proceeding, and
19 Mr . Blancato is not .
20 That protective order or case

Ln
~
21 management order was negotiated between the ~
m
22 parties . I regard what t h e p l a i n tiff' s '~
23 attempted to do there as a breach of the order .
24 We will abide by the -- I won't call it "ruling,"
25 but the "suggestion" of the law clerk . But I do

Vol . 5, Pg . 844
not regard what I have been engaged in here as
anything like interference . I regard the
statements on the record, with the witness
present, as specious, frivolous interference and a
waste of time . I hope we can avoid this in the
future . I don't think it's necessary, the conduct
of this deposition, or to the practice of law in
general .
MR . SHELLER : I will not comment
10 further .
11 (Lunch recess taken from 12 :21 P .M . TO 1 :24 P .M .)
12 VIDEOGRAPHER : We are going back on
13 the record at 1 :24 p .m .
15 Q . Doctor, where we left off before, I
16 was asking you a couple of questions about ammonia
17 and particle size and that sort of thing .
18 What's the smallest particle that the
19 Cambridge filter system will pick up? If you
20 know .
21 A . I don't know . It's -- it's very small . I
22 know where to find the answer ; it's in an article
23 by Bradley Ingredthsen from R .J . Reynolds --
24 COURT REPORTER : I'm sorry, Doctor . I
25 didn't hear you .

Vol . 5, Pg . 845
THE WITNESS : Bradley Ingredthsen,
I-N-G-R-E-D-T-H-S-E-N, from R .J . Reynolds .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . When was that written -- or published?
I'm sorry .
A . Oh, about eight or ten years ago .
Q . So somebody at Reynolds, Bradley --
A . Ingredthsen .
Q . -- actually measured or knows how
10 to --
11 A . Yes . He got a very prestigious prize for his
12 work on the aerosol nature of cigarette smoke .
13 Q . Where is that published?
14 A . Recent Advances In Tobacco Science, and I've
15 forgotten the-year . I don't know whether it's in
16 here or not .
17 Q . Now, Reynolds, when they ammoniate
18 tobacco, there's a couple of processes, one is
19 process gaseous and the other -- another is
20 aqueous? You've heard about that?
21 A . Well, there was some experimental work done
22 on various ways to ammoniate tobacco .
23 Q . And which Reynolds -- which process --
24 does Reynolds --
25 A . I have no idea .

Vol . 5, Pg . 846
1 Q . You say you have no idea? I see .
You've never said in a memorandum that
3 they ammoniate their process using a specific
4 process, in a 1994 or subsequent memo? Did you --
5 or am I mistaken?
6 A . I'm not sure whether I did or not . I -- I
don't know what they're using now, if anything .
8 MR . MCDERMOTT : Is your question
9 directed to today or at any point in time?
10 MR . SHELLER : At any point in time .
12 Q In 1994, did you believe they were
13 using an aqueous process?
14 A . I don't know what they were using . I know -
15 I say they -- they had been experimenting, when I
16 was there, with various ammonia salts, ammonia
17 gas, ammonia solutions, and so on . But .
19 Q. I see .
20 All right, Doctor, at this point I'm
21 going to refer you to a document that was produced
22 by you a few weeks ago called "FTC Smoking Method
23 Used For 'Tar' And Nicotine Data," dated
24 August 30th, 1994 .
25 MR . SHELLER : And we're going to call

Vol . 5, Pg . 84 7
1 this -- what exhibit are we up to? Exhibit 2?
2 COURT REPORTER : Yes, it is .
3 MR . SHELLER : For today .
5 marked for identification )
6 BY MR . SHELLER :
7 t2• And, Doctor, what was this documen t
8 authored by you for ?
9 A . Well, there was some questions about the FTC
10 procedure had come up, about what did the FTC tar
11 number mean and so on . And there were criticisms
12 of the FTC tar number, that it wasn' t
13 representative -- representative of what many
14 smokers would take in, because all smokers smoke
15 differently and the machine smokes rigidly .
1 6 And I got intrigued by this because I
17 was involved, back in the '60s, in this stuff .
1 8 And some of the criticisms that kept appearing in
19 the newspaper and then some of the Time magazine
20 and all this stuff about the validity and whatnot
21 of -- or what the meaning was in terms of the
22 smoker . And I thought, well, these people are
23 complaining about things that we told the FTC in
24 1964, 1965, and they just said we don't want to
• 25 listen to .

Vol . 5, Pg . 848
I
1 Q . Who did you prepare this document for?
2 A . For myself .
3 Q . So this has never been distributed or
disseminated anywhere?
5 A . Well, one of the gentlemen at R & D, I found
6 out, is a good friend of mine . And I heard he was
7 going to participate in a -- some meeting on the
8 FTC thing . And I said to him : Do you want to
9 look at this? And he did . And I gave him a copy .
10 Q . Was that Dr . Townsend?
11 A . That's Dr . Townsend .
12 Q . Did you give him this to use for his
13 preparation as an expert witness in the Connors
14 case in Jacksonville, Florida?
15 A . I didn't know he was ever involved -- well, I
16 do know that he was involved in Florida ; I
17 wouldn't know it was the Connors case .
18 No . This was actually because there
19 was a meeting in -- outside Washington,
20 Gaithersburg or someplace .
21 Q . Who was participating in this meeting?
22 Did he tell you?

Ln
23 A . Well, it was a -- an NCI or FTC meeting . it ~
~
m
24 was open to the public . I don't know who went .
25 wasn't there .

Vol . 5, Pg . 849
Q . Was he going to testify?
A . He was supposed to give some presentation at
it . Whether he did or not, I'm not sure .
Q . So he may or may not have used this
paper for his presentation?
A . I don't know whether he gave a presentation .
I just finished telling you that, sir .
Q. I see .
Did anybody at Reynolds pay you for --
10 A . For this?
11 Q. -- for the time you spent doing this
12 paper?
` 13 A . No .
14 Q. So this was not part of your hourly --
15 A. No . I say, I was just intrigued by the fact
16 that, 30 years after all of this stuff came out
17 and we had told them, item after item after item,
18 all of these things became : Gee, we've never
19 heard of this before . And the FTC knew all about
20 it, back in 1964, '65 . Ln

N
~
~
21 Q. I see . m
~
m
22 Now, Doctor, in your -- on the first orn
Ln
23 page of the document, on page 1 . Not the roman
24 numeral page, it's -- I'm referring you to . You
25 say the "Statement of Purpose ." And it starts out

Vol . 5, Pg . 850
roman numeral one, "Intended Use of Smoking Method
Results, A Statement of Purpose" . And then you
say : (Reading)
The results from the FTC
analysis of the "tar" and
nicotine yields in the
mainstream smoke from
cigarettes marketed in the
U .S . was intended to
10 accomplish the following :
11 To permit the catalog --
12 cataloging of sequential
13 listing of the cigarettes for
14 their MS, mainstream, yields
15 of these two smoke entities
16 [and in parentheses there's
17 some dates] generated under
18 standard and reproducible
19 conditions . Subsequently a
20 third MS entity, CO, was
21 added to the FTC listing
22 (FTC, 1981) .
23 And then the second purpose, you say,
24 was : (Reading)
251 To permit the consumer

Vol . 5, Pg . 851
who wished to continue
smoking to select a cigarette
whose MS 11 tar --
Is that what that stands for?
A . No, it was my lousy typing . It's supposed to
be a quote -- quote mark .
Q . I see . (Reading)
MS tar --
A . If you use a typewriter, the quote mark is
10 right next to the "1" .
11 Q. I see . (Reading)
12 -- and/or nicotine yield
13 was compatible with his/her
14 concerns about the effects of
15 cigarette smoking on his/her
16 health .
17 It was never anticipated
18 by the FTC or by the
19 cigarette manufacturers that
20 the FTC lists could serve as
21 a means to catalog or rate
22 cigarette smokers .
23 "Smokers"?
24 A . "Smokers," right .
251 Q . So those were the two basic purposes,

Vol . 5, Pg . 852
1 right?
2 A . Well --
3 Q And --
4 A . That's what the FTC said .
5 Q . Right . Where did the FTC say that
6 were the two purposes? Is that in -- you quote
7 from a notification from the FTC that appears on
8 page 9 . Is that where you believe that
9 information is reproduced? Referring to the
10 March 25th, 1966 --
11 A . Yeah . That's it . Mr . O'Shea's letter?
12 (Discussion off the record)
14 Doctor, your -- your testimony, and
15 Dr . Townsend's, I believe, at the Connors case,
16 was that the FTC, in 1966, required the cigarette
17 manufacturers to list the FTC Cambridge filter
18 figures for tar and nicotine ; is that correct? Is
19 that your understanding?
20 A. No . I think the FTC rule was that the
21 analysis was to be done according to the way they
22 said it should be done . I don't know whether the
23 cigarette -- as a matter of fact, I think the FTC
24 does the listing, doesn't it?
25 Q . Well, so -- is the -- did the FTC,

Vol . 5, Pg . 853
Federal Trade Commission, require the cigarette
manufacturers, in 1966, to anywheres list the tar
and nicotine levels according to the Cambridge
filter system on anything?
A . I think it --
MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . No
foundation .
THE WITNESS : I think it ended up on
some packs .
11 Q• Did the FTC require that it appear on
12 the packs of cigarettes?
13 A . I don't know what the FTC required or didn't
14 require, sir . All I know is that the analytical
15 method was to be thus and so . No argument .
16 Q . Did they require that?
17 A . What?
18 MR . McDERMOTT : What?
20 Q . That it had to be by that analytical
21 method .
22 A . That's what the letter says, doesn't it?
23 Q . I see . I see .
24 And is there anywheres in the letter
25 where they -- well, in looking at your page 9 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 854
And let's read what you say on page 9 . (Reading)
The Cigarette
Advertising Guides
promulgated by the
Commission --
MR . McDERMOTT : Excuse me . Let me
raise a point of order . There looks like may be
an elliptical period . I don't know whether that
indicates some matter has been omitted or not .
10 Maybe, before you read this in and represent it to
11 be the entire letter, we can clarify that .
12 MR . SHELLER : What, the three dots?
13 MR . McDERMOTT : Yeah .
14 MS . KNISELY : Actually, the three
15 dots -- the elliptical is in the actual letter
16 itself .
17 MR . McDERMOTT : Okay . Thank you .
19 Q. Okay . (Reading)
20 The Cigarette
21 Advertising Guides
22 promulgated by the Commission
23 in September 1955 provided
24 that no representation should
25 be made that [in quotes] "any

Vol . g. 855
brand of cigarette or the
smoke therefrom is low in
nicotine or tars . . . when .it
has not been established by
competent scientific proof
applicable at the time of
dissemination that the claim
is true, and if true, that
such a difference or
10 differences are significant ."
11 On the basis of the facts now
12 available to it, the
13 Commission has determined
14 that a factual statement of
15 the tar and nicotine content
16 (expressed in milligrams) of
17 the mainstream smoke from a
18 cigarette would not be in
19 violation of such Guides, or
20 of any of the provisions of
21 law administered by the
22 Commission, so long as they
23 -- in -- (1) [according to
24 your page nine] no collateral
• 25 representations (other than

Vol . 5, Pg . 856
1 factual statements of tar and
2 nicotine contents of
3 cigarettes offered for sale
4 to the public) are made, and
5 (2) the statement of tar and
6 nicotine content is supported
7 by adequate records of tests
8 conducted with the Cambridge
9 Filter Method, as described
10 in an article entitled
11 "Determination of Particulate
12 Matter and Alkaloids (as
13 nicotine) in Cigarette
14 Smoke," by C .L . Ogg, which
15 appeared in the Journal of
16 the Association of Official
17 Agricultural Chemists, 47,
18 No . 2, 1964 . It is the
19 Commission's position that it
20 is in the public interest to
21 promote the dissemination of
22 truthful information
23 concerning cigarettes which
24 may be material and desired
25 by the consuming public .

Vol . 5, Pg . 857
Did that letter require -- is that
what you base your view, that this letter, issued
by the FTC in 1966, was the commission directing
the tobacco industry that the only way they could
list tar and nicotine levels was by the Cambridge
method?
A . Yes, that's right . That's the way it was . I
mean, this is an edict from the FTC .
Q . I see .
10 A . And you kept saying "you have written" . I
11 haven't done -- I didn't write that --
12 Q . No, no, I'm reading it .
13 Now, this letter doesn't require you
14 to list anything on your packs does it?
16 the question . Dr . Rodgman .
18 Q. Dr . -- Reynolds, does it? It doesn't
19 require Reynolds to list anything, does it? Read
20 it, please .
21 MR . BLANCATO : Well, objection .
23 Q . Doesn't the letter say that, if the
24 Commission has no problem, no objections to you
25 doing that, if it's supported by the Cambridge

Vol . 5, Pg . 858
1 method?
3 Q. Okay . Did the tobacco -- you say the
tobacco industry objected to that?
6 of the question .
7 THE WITNESS : No, I didn't say that .
8 BY MR . SHELLER :
9 Q . I thought you said they did object to
10 that .
11 A. No . I said they objected -- and if you read
12 the rest of the article, that we pointed out to
13 the FTC that the method they were offering did do
14 what they asked about ranking cigarettes, but it
15 was very incomplete in what else it --
16 Q. Well, Dr . Rodgman, I believe you had
17 written a memo, and it was entitled -- it appears
18 as appendix B in your FT -- in your article here
19 that you gave to Mr . -- Dr . Townsend . And you
20 say -- it's entitled "A Short Explanation and
21 Analysis of Methods for Measuring Tar and Nicotine
22 in Cigarette Smoke," right?
23 A . Yes .
24 You're familiar with that one?
251 A . Yes, I'm familiar with that .

Vol . 5, Pg . 859
Q . Now, you give -- you wrote that in
1965, in January . And who did you give that to at
that time?
A . 1965? Where did you get that date?
Q . It says January/February 1965 . You
say .
MS . BRACHTL : Where are you in the
document?
MS . KNISELY : Page 37 .
10 MS . BRACHTL : Thank you .
12 Page 37, Doctor . In fact, I'll give
13 you a draft of the agreement and the original that
14 was produced for us in your boxes . The draft will
15 be 4, and the actual article 5 .
16 MR . McDERMOTT : What's 3?
17 MR . SHELLER : Oh, we don't have 3? We
18 didn't mark that yet . It's 3 and 4 .
19 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Numbers 3 and 4
20 were marked for identification)
21 MS . EASON : Just for clarification,
22 could you please read into the record the Bates
23 numbers that are stamped .
24 MR . SHELLER : There is a Bates number
251 on it .

Vol . 5, Pg . 860
1 MS . KNISELY : On one of them, I
2 believe .
3 MR . SHELLER : No, on both of them .
4 The draft is 501013245 . And the -- I assume the
5 final, because it's undated, 501013225 .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
8 Q . Now, Documents 3 and 4, Exhibits 3 and
9 4, those are your documents . You prepared them,
10 right? They were given to us in the boxes that
11 you produced a few weeks ago .
13 the question .
15 Q . Did you prepare those?
16 A . Yeah . Yes, I did .
17 Q . Now, who did you give these
18 documents -- this document to at Reynolds?
19 MR . BLANCATO : Which one?
21 Q . Exhibit 4, or 3, whichever you gave .

Ln
22 Did you give one or both? One is listed as a N
~
N
G
23 draft with a date and the other is undated .
~
m
24 MR . McDERMOTT : Do you have a time ~
m
251 frame?

Vol . 5, Pg . 861
1 MR . SHELLER : 1965, I presume .
2 THE WITNESS : I don't know whether I
3 gave them to Dr . Senkus or Mr . Ramm, Henry Ramm .
4 BY MR . SHELLER :
5 Q• Do you know if those documents were
6 ever given to anybody at the Federal Trade
7 Commission?
8 A . I don't know whether they were given in
9 exactly this form, but I -- my understanding was
10 that some of the information in them were provided
11 to the FTC .
12 Q . Do you know which information?
13 A . No, I don't, sir .
14 Q . I see . Well on page -- how do you
15 know what was given -- something was given to the
16 Federal Trade Commission?
17 A . There were some documents about the
18 collaborative submission to the Federal Trade
19 Commission that had some of this stuff in it .
20 And -- which, you know, you don't ask the vice
21 president of legal counsel : Did you submit what I
22 gave you?
23 MR . SHELLER : Have the documents that
24 were submitted to the Federal Trade Commission
25 been produced in the -- any discovery materials?

1

Vol . 5, Pg . 862
1 MR . McDERMOTT : Sitting here, I have
2 no idea .
3 MR . SHELLER : Could you find out?
4 Because we've searched and we cannot find them .
5 MR . McDERMOTT : All right . Well, why
6 don't you put the inquiry in writing to Mark
7 Belasic, since I'm -- because I'm not continuously
8 involved in this case .
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q. Dr . Rodgman, in page 3 of the --
11 MR . McDERMOTT : Let me also suggest,
12 however, that the information, I'm sure, is
13 available through the records of the FTC, as well,
14 as another way of obtaining this information .
15 MR . SHELLER : They may be . They may
16 be .
18 Q . On page 3 of the documents, do you
19 know which one you gave to Mr . -- Dr . Senkus? Was
20 it that -- was it the draft or the one that has no
21 date on it?
23 the question .
25 Q . They both say the same thing ; there's

Vol . 5, Pg . 863
1 no difference .
2 A . Yeah . I assume that the one had no -- not
3 the draft on it . In fact, I didn't think they
4 were the same .
5 Q . Well, if there is a difference, I
6 didn't pick it up . You can tell --
7 A . Well, if you didn't pick it up, you missed
8 11 -- 8 pages of it .
9 Q . Oh, I'm sorry . Oh, you're talking
10 about the appendix . No, I wasn't --
11 A . Well, that's part of the memorandum, isn't
12 it?
13 Q . No, you're right . I meant the body of
14 the document itself, not the appendix .
15 A . Well, that's part of the body of the
16 document .
17 Q. Yeah, you're right . You're right .
18 You got me .
19 Now, Doctor, on page 3, you say :
20 (Reading)
21 The conclusion is
22 therefore inescapable, that
23 labeling the amount of "tar
24 and nicotine" on a cigarette
25 package cannot give to the

Vol . 5, Pg . 864
1 smoker meaningful information
2 as to the amount or
3 composition of the total
4 solids and nicotine he
5 receives from the cigarettes
6 he smokes . He is more likely
7 to be misled than informed .
8 That was your opinion then, Doctor?
9 A . Yeah . Not mine -- not only mine, but it's --
10 but expressed by other people since then .
11 Q . And your opinion today is the same ; is
12 that correct?
14 Q . And it hasn't changed through all
15 these years?
16 A . No . It -- you cannot compare three different
17 smokers who smoke in a different way to what's
18 smoked in a machine .- In fact, the machine does
19 not inhale -- exhale, I'm sorry . But people do .
20 Q . Now, Doctor
21 A . I might recommend that, if you want more
22 information on this, you read the report of the
23 Froggatt Committee, which is in -- sometime in the
24 1980s, when Dr . Froggatt says exactly the same
25 thing as we said in 1965 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 865
1 Q . And this has always been Reynolds'
2 view also since you've been there?
3 A . Well, I haven't heard anybody come out and
4 say that they went along with doing the analysis
5 the way we were told to do it .
6 Q . Now, did Reynolds ever -- now, you say
7 that the -- this letter of March of 1966 from the
FTC required you to do it -- the -- the tar and
9 milligram system the way you des -- the Cambridge
10 system, correct?
11 A . That's what the FTC said to do .
12 Q. Right .
13 Did Reynolds ever submit another
14 procedure recommendation as to how to get
15 information on tar and nicotine levels? Did they
16 make a recommendation of any type?
17 A . Well, we had provided some information before
18 that letter came out . And I don't know whether
19 anybody did after that . I -- you know, you're
20 fighting the FTC . We had a little bit of a
21 problem that -- for example, if you read Ogg's

Ln
N
22 method, for that -- at that time it was a very ~
m
23 good analysis for nicotine . &b
24 Q . That was 1964?
251 A . Right . But, eventually, you know, when

Vol . 5, Pg . 866
1 people are testing cigarettes that are on the
• 2 market, our competitors or experimental cigarettes
3 or cigarettes designed in-house, that was a very
4 slow procedure . And as you know, the FTC equation
5 is wet TPM is tar, plus water, plus nicotine .
6 And people like analytical chemists at
7 Reynolds and other places determined that you
8 could get as accurate nicotine values and water
9 values by doing it with -- it's called gas
10 chromatography . And the beauty of a gas
11 chromatography system is that you can do it
12 automatically . You can do -- load up a carousel
13 with 50/60 things to be measured and just turn it
14 on and let it run .
15 Q . Did the FTC ever tell you, you
16 couldn't use that method?
17 A. No . We persuaded them, and they ended up
18 using it .
19 Q . They did .
20 A . Yeah .
21 Q . So when did -- is that what you now

u,
~
22 use to label your packs? Reynolds packs? ~
m
23 A . I don't know what they use . I don't know ~
CO
N
24 whether they label packs or not . But they do use
25 the analytical procedure of gas chromatograph .

~ --- ---- --- - _ - _ -

Vol . 5, Pg . 867
1 Q . When did that come into effect?
2 A . Oh, I don't know .
3 Q . When you were there?
4 A . Well, I was there -- excuse me . I can't put
5 a year on it . It was probably -- well, let me
6 look . I might be able to get it for you . Let's
7 see here .
'8 (Witness reviews document)
9 Okay . Well, I thought it was in here
10 on the -- on page 21 . Oh, okay . Okay . Okay . C .
11 Page 24, there's a footnote "Gas Chromatographic
12 Method ." And if we run back in time, I believe
13 you'll see that the 1973, under "Nicotine
14 Determination," a man called Randolph, that is
15 1973/1974, has a little "C," which indicates that
16 was a gas chromatographic method that was
17 described -- well, in fact -- well, there's
18 actually some before that . Put i believe that was
19 the one that may have been presented, written up
20 and --
21 Q . So that was of a -- known about since
22 1973?
23 A . I think so . I may be wrong about that .
24 Q . Give or take a little bit .
• 25 A . But the people in Europe and what -- the

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 868
1 CORESTA method and so on, eventually everybody
2 went to gas chromatographic method . If you've
3 ever done a water and smoke by the old fashioned
4 method, I won't say it -- I guess I wouldn't say
5 it the way I would think it . It's very difficult .
6 Q . And that's more accurate than the
7 Cambridge method, right?
9 the question . Misstates prior testimony .
10 THE WITNESS : It's not -- the
11 determination of the water, sir, has nothing to do
12 with the Cambridge method .
14 Q . I see .
15 A . The Cambridge method is the collection . And
16 when you get -- the old days, you took the
17 Cambridge pad, you got rid of the particulate
18 matter from the Cambridge pad, and you used one
19 part of it to determine the nicotine by the
20 Griffith/Still method and you did the water in the
21 other part by what's called the Karl Fischer
22 titration .
23 The way we did it with the modified
24 method, you took the stuff off the Cambridge
25 filter pad, the same way, and you put it in the -

Vol . 5, Pg . 869
I
1 and did it by gas chromatography and calculate the
2 water and nicotine .
3 In fact, the old method really didn't
4 do nicotine . It expressed alkaloids as a lump .
5 And, of course, nicotine was 90 percent of the
6 alkaloids, so they just assumed it -- or called it
7 nicotine . But the new method gave it -- the
8 nicotine its value, and actually you could get the
9 nornicotine value, if you wanted it .
10 t2 • Did the new method also take into
11 account the variations among smokers?
12 A . Sir, the new method involved the same smoking
13 procedure outlined by the FTC method, which says
14 you will collect the cigarettes, you will
15 condition them at such-and-such temperature for
16 such-and-such a humidity, you will smoke them on
17 the machine in the laboratory designed . It had
18 nothing to do with the -- relating them to the
19 smoking ; it was just as wrong then as it was
20 before .
21 Q . Well, can you tell me, if the FTC was
22 so wrong, why were they asked to give you
23 permission to use that method?
25 the question .

Vol . 5, Pg . 870
r
1 BY MR . SHELLER :
• 2 Q Isn't that what that letter does?
3 A . What letter?
4 MS . EASON : Objection to the form .
5 BY MR . SHELLER :
6 Q . That March 1966 letter . Isn't that
7 giving the tobacco industry the right to use that
method if they want to use it?
11 MR . SHELLER : You want to read it?
12 THE WITNESS : The letter says you will
13 use it that way .
15 Q• The letter doesn't say you will use
16 it . Where does the letter say -- point --
17 MR . McDERMOTT : The letter requires
18 every public statement, with respect to tar and
19 nicotine, to employ that method, and it encourages
20 the use of the method and the information . But
21 the record and the letter speak for itself . Let's

Ln
22 move on .
23 MR . SHELLER : No . Your representation
24 of the letter is not correct . Would you -- does
25 the witness -- we're going to mark a copy of the

Vol . 5, Pg . 871
letter . We'll have the letter read .
MR . McDERMOTT : You've already read
it -
MR . SHELLER : Exhibit 5 . No, the
letter is a little different .
MS . EASON : You have a representation
that the letter was identical .
MS . KNISELY : No, no . I said that the
stars -- Mr . McDermott had raised the issue of
10 whether that star pattern was in the original or
11 whether it was an ellipsis that they had removed
12 words .
13 MR . McDERMOTT : Well, let's use the
14 letter, then . Do we have copies?
15 MS . KNISELY : There were copies made,
16 and I assumed everybody took their copy .
17 MR . SHELLER : Where are the copies for
18 the witness, please? Here's one for you .
20 marked for identification)
23 Q . Now, Doctor, would you tell me -- and
24 you read me the words that the Commission used in
25 its letter that said you must use the Cambridge

Vol . 5, Pg . 872
method at all times to list tar and nicotine on
cigarettes . Would you read the words that say
that?
A . Well, I think it's implicit in the way that
they said this is the method .
Q . Implicit? Can you point to me any
words in the letter that say you have to use this
method, and you must list the tar and nicotine
levels on the cigarettes?
10 MR . McDERMOTT : Object . Compound .
12 Q . Does the letter require you to list
• 13
14
the tar and nicotine levels on the cigarettes?
A . No, it doesn't .
15 Q . It doesn't .
16 A . No .
17 Q . What does it say? if it --
19 the question .
21 Q . Does it say, if you want to use the
22 tar and nicotine levels on the cigarettes, that
23 you can, using the Cambridge method, without
24 objection of the FTC?
• 25 A . Yeah . It says here : (Reading)

Vol . 5, Pg . 873
1 The statement has to be
2 supported by adequate records
3 of tests conducted by the
4 Cambridge filter method .
5 Q. Right . So they say they won't do
6 anything to you about false advertising if you do
7 it that way?
8 A . Well, I don't know about advertising, sir . I
9 don't --
10 Q . Well, that's what this is all about,
11 isn't it, false advertising, sir?
12 MR . McDERMOTT : Let the witness finish
13 his answer, please .
14 MR . SHELLER : I'm letting him finish
15 his answer .
16 THE WITNESS : I'm not in the
17 advertising business .
19 Q . The tobacco industry had -- isn't
20 it -- do you remember that history about there
21 being a -- a tar and nicotine derby in the '50s
22 and '60s? And the FTC was getting concerned about
23 false advertising, right?
25 of the question .

Vol . 5, Pg . 874
1 MS . EASON : Objection to the form of
2 the question .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
4 Q . So didn't the tobacco -- do you
5 remember that?
6 A. Yes .
7 Q . And didn't the FTC say they were going
8 to look into false advertising?
9 A . They did, in 1957 .
10 Q. Right . And didn't the tobacco
11 industry want to have the ability to put tar and
12 nicotine levels on cigarettes and not be
13 threatened with false advertising claims?
14 A . I don't know that, air .
16 foundation .
18 Q . Didn't the tobacco industry seek
19 permission from the FTC to do it this way, with
20 the Cambridge system?
22 Q . You don't remember . You don't know or
23 you don't remember?
24 A . I don't know .

Vol . 5, Pg . 875
1 Now, Doctor, in looking at your quote
S 2 in the memo on page 9, would you please look at
3 number -- the letter . And you quote in the middle
4 of the body of the letter "no collateral
5 representations" . And would you read that from
6 your page 9 . it says number one . Just that one
7 number one part .
8 A . Yeah, I've read it .
9 Q . Could you read it for the camera, out
10 loud .
11 A . I've already read it, sir .
12 Q . I know, but I'd like you to do it
13 again .
14 A . Why in --
15 Q . I'll tell you why .
16 A . (Reading)
17 No collateral
18 representations (other than
22 to the public) are made .
23 Q . Now, would you read Exhibit 5, which
24 is the actual copy of the letter . To the camera,
25 please .

Vol . 5, Pg . 876
1 A . (Reading)
2 No collateral
3 representations, other than
6 cigarettes offered for sale,
7 are made, expressly or by
8 implication, as to reduction
9 or elimination of health
10 hazards .
11 Q . Could you read it again . I think you
12 left out a couple of words .
13 A . (Reading)
14 No collateral
15 representation, other than
19 to the public, are made,
20 expressly or by implication,
21 as to reduction or
22 elimination of health
23 hazards .
24 Q . Why did you leave out --
251 MR . McDERMOTT : I move to strike the

Vol . 5, Pg . 877
1 last question and answer .
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
3 Q . Why did you leave out the part
4 "expressly or" -- in your article that you gave to
5 Dr . Townsend --
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . -- "expressly or by implication, as to
9 reduction or elimination of health hazards"? Why
10 was that left out?
11 MR . McDERMOTT : I object to the form
12 of the question . You're misstating prior
13 testimony .
14 MR . SHELLER : I'm not misstating
15 anything . You can answer it .
17 Q . Why was that not in your
18 A . I probably just goofed, sir .
19 Q . You goofed .
20 A . Umm .
21 Q . Well, isn't it true that the FTC
22 didn't want any representations, expressly or by
23 implication, as to the reduction of elimination of
24 health hazards by reason of the -- this late
25 information about tar and nicotine?

Vol . 5, Pg . 878
A . That's what they said in the letter .
Q . That's what they said .
Now, would you look back at page 1 of
your article .
A . Uh-huh .
Q• And the second point that you made at
the top is : (Reading)
To permit the consumer
who wished to continue
10 smoking to select a cigarette
11 whose MS tar [mainstream tar]
12 and/or nicotine yield was
13 compatible with his/her
14 concerns about the effects of
15 cigarette smoking on his/her
16 health .
17 That wasn't what the FTC was saying could
18 be done, isn't that correct, according to this
19 letter? There could be no implication of that
20 drawn permitted .
21 A . Well not in the advertising .
23 the question .
25 Q . Oh, not in the advertising .

Vol . 5, Pg . 879
1 A . That was what the whole list was put together
2 for .
3 Q . So the implication then, from the
4 tobacco industry's point, was that -- that's why
5 the list was put together?
7 the question .
9 MR . McDERMOTT : No foundation .
10 THE WITNESS : You've lost me with your
11 question .
13 Q . Well, wasn't the intent of Reynolds to
14 have the public draw the implication that there
15 was, by lowering tar and nicotine levels, a
16 reduction or elimination of health hazards?
18 the question . No foundation .
20 question .
21 THE WITNESS : If you look back at why
22 this was done, why the FTC got into the act, it Ln
~
-J
23 started in 1957 with Dr . Wynder, who said, from r
Ob
24 his animal work, that if you kept backing off on m
W
cn
25 treating the mouse skin with cigarette smoke

Vol . 5, Pg . 880
1 condensate, you got to a point where you didn't
2 get any tumors on the mice . And he said, if this
3 is translatable to the smoker, if -- then,
4 reduction of the tar from cigarettes by 40 percent
5 would significantly lessen the possibility of
6 respiratory tract cancer .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . I see .
9 A . And that was the reason the FTC got into the
10 business of : All right, if you lower it, and if
11 people are concerned one way or another --
12 Q . Well do you know why the FTC got into
13 it? Were you there at a meeting?
14 A . Well, I read what they were talking about,
15 back then . it was all over .
16 Q . Weren't they talking about false
17 advertising from the tar and nicotine derby that
18 was going on --
20 the question .
22 Q . -- in the '60s?
23 A . I don't know that, sir .
24 MR . BLANCATO : Object .
• 25 BY MR . SHELLER :
1

Vol . 5, Pg . 881
2 Now, isn't it true that in 1964 the
3 Surgeon General, for the first time, came out with
4 a report that said cigarettes cause cancer?
5 A . Well, it's -
6 S2 • Was that the first report?
7 A . Well, t hat was the first Surgeon General's
8 report . And that really spurred the FTC to get
into the act, putting -- in fact, the government
10 agency had said this, and with the work of
11 Dr . Wynder, they put it altogether and said :
12 Let's have a list .
13 Q . So -- and the tobacco industry would
14 benefit from that list because the public, who
15 might have stopped smoking, was led to believe
16 that, because the tar and nicotine levels were
17 being lowered, the cigarettes were now safe or
18 safer?
20 of the question . No foundation .
22 MS . EASON : Objection to the form of
23 the question .
251 Q . Isn't that correct?

Vol . 5, Pg . 882
J
1 A . I don't know that, sir .
Q . Isn't that what the tobacco industry
contended?
the question .
7 question .
8 MR . BLANCATO : Objection to the form .
10 THE WITNESS : Not that I know of .
12 Q• Isn't it true that the tobacco
13 industry wanted to keep the public smoking, and
14 not stopping as a result of the Surgeon General's
15 report about cancer?
17 the question .
19 Q . Isn't that correct?
21 THE WITNESS : I don't know that, sir .
23 Q . You didn't know that, the tobacco
24 industry didn't want to do that?
25 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form --

1

Vol . 5, Pg . 883
1 THE WITNESS : You got to remember, in
2 1964 I was a bench chemist .
3 MR . McDERMOTT : Dr . Rodgman --
4 BY MR . SHELLER :
5 Q . You were a bench chemist . How about
6 in 1970?
7 MR . McDERMOTT : Excuse me . Just a
8 minute . Gentleman, Dr . Rodgman, when I interpose
9 an objection, please wait until I finish my
10 objection . It will be easier on everybody here,
11 including the court reporter . And please give me
12 a chance to object, because your questions are
13 getting outrageous .
14 MR . SHELLER : My questions are not
15 outrageous ; they are very true . You know, you
16 always object when things start sticking you in
17 the chest . Why don't you just say "objection" and
18 allow the witness to testify . I understand your
19 problem and I would be troubled too, if I was
20 Reynolds' counsel . Don't laugh, it's true .
22 Q . Now, Doctor, if you look at your
23 report, Dr . Townsend, on page 27 --
24 A . This report wasn't to Dr . Townsend .
0 25 Q . Well, the one you gave Dr . Townsend .

Vol . 5, Pg . 884
1 A . What page?
• 2 Q . Twenty-seven . Now, do you see the
3 chart that you prepared at the bottom of the
4 report, "Table 9" you call it?
5 A . Uh-huh .
6 Q . And in Table 9 -- and we're going to
7 mark this table at a separate exhibit .
8 MR . SHELLER : Call it -- what number
9 am I up to?
10 COURT REPORTER : Six .
11 MR . SHELLER : Six .
13 Q . In Exhibit 6, Table 9, you define it
14 as : (Reading)
15 85-millimeter Winston
16 and Marlboro : Comparison of
17 FTC carbon monoxide,
18 nicotine, and 'tar' yields at
19 standard and more 'realistic'
20 smoking parameters .
21 What were the "more realistic smoking
22 parameters" that you figured out to use here?
23 A . This was from a report written by somebody at
24 Reynolds, I believe .
25 Q . What are realistic smoking conditions?

Vol . 5, Pg . 885
r
1 According to Reynolds . .
3 the question .
4 THE WITNESS : Sir, this was just a
5 table that, when you change the smoking regime,
6 you got the higher numbers .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
8 Q . Well, is this a report by a Dr . Rix
9 that you're referring to, at Reynolds?
10 A . It may be .
11 Q . You cite that in the body of your
12 report?
13 A . Right .
14 Q . And what does he describe as more
15 realistic smoking conditions?
16 A . It has those -- the parameters are listed
17 there .
18 Q . What are they?
19 A . Sixty-five-milliliter puff, two-second puff,
20 one puff every 45 seconds .
21 Q . And what was the FTC standard?

Ln
FA
~
22 A . Thirty-five, two, and once a minute . ~
m
23 Q . I see . ~
~
m
~
24 And now you took that material
25 prepared -- done by Dr . Rix and converted it into

Vol . 5, Pg . 88 6
1 a table? Or is that table right from his article ?
2 A . I've forgotten . It may be -- probably
taken -- he may have had it in a little different
4 format .
5 Q . And what he did is he -- or you -- I'm
6 not sure who did the table, now . But the table
7 you used from Reynolds says "FTC smoking
8 conditions for Winston and Marlboro comparisons,"
9 right? That's -- Marlboro is made by Philip
10 Morris ?
12 Q. And Winston by Reynolds, right ?
13 A . Right .
14 S2 Q . And the -- and according to the FT C
15 tar levels from the FTC standard, the Winston was
16 20 .6 tar, and there's a parenthesis there, 20 .9 in
17 parenthesis, and it refers to a note A . Do you
18 know what that refers to ?
19 A . It was the percent difference between the
2 0 Winston and Marlboro .
2 1 Q. And the Marlboro was at 16 .3 . And th e
22 FTC nicotine level for Winston was 1 .43 milligrams
23 and for Marlboro it was 1 .08 . And the carbon Ln
24 monoxide for the Winston was 19 .1 and for Marlboro m
25 16 .2 ; is that correct ?

Vol . 5, Pg . 887
1 A . Right .
Q . But when it was done according to
3 realistic conditions, smoking conditions -- and
4 that's the title in the chart, right?
5 A . Right .
6 Q . The Winston was actually
7 35 .7 milligrams in tar and 2 .35 milligrams
8 nicotine ; is that correct?
9 A. Yes .
10 Q . Can I ask you a question? Is that
11 exactly pretty much the same as the 1955
12 16 milligrams of tar and nicotine for the
13 cigarettes in those days?
15 the question .
16 THE WITNESS : Well -- no . The --
17 well, they're comparable, but done under
18 different -- under --
20 Q . Pretty close, though?
21 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . Let him
22 finish his answer, please .
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Let him complete his
24 answer .
251 THE WITNESS : In 1955, of course, the

Vol . 5, Pg . 888
1 numbers that were -- are in the graph, I'm sorry,
2 were done with the top figures .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
4 Q . With the "top figures" . What do you
5 mean? The 35 .
6 A . Close to that .
7 Q . The realistic ones, right?
8 A . Right .
9 MR . McDERMOTT : No, no, no, no . Just
10 the opposite .
11 MR . SHELLER : No . I think he --
12 would -- would you --
• 14 Q . As I understand it, in 1955 the
15 Winstons were approximately 35 milligrams of tar,
16 weren't they?
17 A . Yeah . But they were determined by a
18 35-milliliter puff .
19 Q . They were?
20 (Witness nods head .) Yeah .
21 Q . I see .
22 A . I mean, if you look back historically at the
23 smoking parameters, which were set in 1936 by some
24 people at American Tobacco and everybody used it
25 worldwide, more or less, it was 35-milliliter

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 889
1 puff, one puff a minute, two-second duration . And
2 the numbers -- say, Winston, Camel, whatever
3 cigarette you're talking about in '55, were
4 determined with that .
5 Q . How do you know that? Is that -- the
6 1955 numbers that Reynolds had was based on a
7 35-milliliter puff?
8 A . Yes . There was some slight difference in the
analytical procedure for nicotine .
10 Q . What was the difference?
11 A . Well, I had just gotten at Reynolds at that
12 time . But I believe they were using a
13 modification of the Griffith/Still thing that
14 Mr . Cundiff had incorporated . After all, there
15 was no really set method by that -- at that time .
16 Q . So, then --
17 A . And --
18 Q . -- your -- your point that the --
19 you're responding to Dr . Wynder and Dr . Hoffmann .
20 If you use realistic figures, are you able to tell
21 the jury that there -- that you can actually
22 conclude that there's a lowering of tar and
23 nicotine in the realistic conditions of smoking
24 today?
25 A . Well, what -- you don't compare apples and

Vol . 5, Pg . 890
1 oranges . If you're going to make a comparison,
2 let's be fair . If you're going to say these are
3 the conditions we will use in the smoking machine,
4 let's compare the '55 cigarette done the same way .
5 Q . But you're not doing that .
6 A . Pardon?
Q . You said it wasn't -- you don't know
8 how it was --
10 the question .
12 Q . It wasn't -- if you're going to
13 compare, how do you know what the realistic
14 conditions would have shown in 1955?
15 A . Well, if you use these numbers, if you use
16 those numbers on a'55 cigarette, presumably you
17 would have got higher numbers than are in the
18 graph .
19 Q . Presumably . I thought you don't use
20 calculated, you like to be realistic, you want to
21 know what they are . Remember, we went through
22 this with nicotine? You don't like using
23 calculated numbers?
24 MR . BLANCATO : Let's not harass the
25 witness, please .

Vol . 5, Pg . 891
1 MR . SHELLER : I'm not harassing him .
2 He's the one who talks about calculated numbers .
3 MR . McDERMOTT : You're asking the
4 witness to apply a different regimen, to
5 hypothesize an answer, and then you're criticizing
6 him for trying to respond to your question?
7 MR . SHELLER : Well, he's the one who
8 criticizes the people who wanted to figure out the
9 nicotine levels by calculating them .
10 MR . McDERMOTT : This is nonsense .
11 Let's -
12 MR . SHELLER : Well, I understand . I
13 understand nonsense to you, maybe .
15 Q . Now, Doctor, so what you're really
16 saying today, that if you use realistic conditions
17 for determining tar and nicotine levels, you have
18 to make an estimate of what those conditions would
19 have been in 1955 to determine whether or not the
20 tar and nicotine levels were actually lower
21 today --
22 A . Well, you'd use -- you'd use the same
23 conditions . Wouldn't you?
24 Q . Well, you would ; but you didn't .
25 You're saying you don't know what the realistic

Vol . 5, Pg . 892
1 conditions of smoking would have shown in 1955 .
2 Unless these aren't the realistic conditions in
3 1955 .
4 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . Are you
5 talking about the values they got here for tar and
6 nicotine --
7 MR . SHELLER : Uh-huh .
8 MR . BLANCATO : -- or are you talking
9 about 35-milliliter puffs? Or --
10 MR . SHELLER : I'm only trying to
11 figure out what realistic conditions existed for
12 smoking in 1955 .
13 THE WITNESS : Well, I said, if you're
14 going to make a comparison, you would use these
15 realistic conditions that are listed here by
16 Dr . Rix for the 1955 cigarette .
18 Q . Why would you assume those are the
19 realistic conditions for smoking a cigarette in
20 1955?
21 A . Well, I think, if you notice, they're in
22 quotation marks . N
N
23 Q. Right . But why would -- wouldn't m
24 somebody who got their adequate dose of nicotine -J

m
Co
25 in 1955 with the higher, quote, tar and nicotine
J

Vol . 5, Pg . 893
1 levels you talk about, have a different realistic
2 smoking level?
3 A . They may or may not .
5 question .
7 the question .
8 BY MR . SHELLER :
9 Q . You don't know the answer to that, do
10 you?
11 A . Well, as I have said repeatedly, sir,
12 everybody smokes differently .
13 Q . Right . And you don't -- do you know
14 what the realistic smoking conditions were, as
15 you -- in 1955?
16 A. No . And I don't know what they are now .
17 Q. Well, apparently Dr . Rix and you
18 reached the conclusion in this 1994 article as to
19 what they were .
20 A . I was summarizing some of the work --
21 Q . For now .
22 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . Please let
23 the witness finish his question .
25 Q . Isn't it true, Doctor --

Vol . 5, Pg . 894
I
1 MR . McDERMOTT : You cut the witness
2 off . Let him finish his answer, counselor .
MR . SHELLER : Fine .
4 BY MR . SHELLER :
5 Q . Do you have something to finish, sir?
6 A . As you notice, I'm just reporting what
7 Dr . Rix reported .
8 Q. I see . You don't agree with him?
9 A . I was reporting what Dr . Rix reported .
10 Q . Do you agree with him or disagree with
11 him?
12 A . I assume he found what he found .
13 Q . Do you agree with him?
15 THE WITNESS : I don't know how you
16 mean, "agree" .
18 Q . Do you think he was right?
19 A . Well, I said, he -- I assume that what -- the
20 experimental data he found, he found .
21 Q. Do you think he was right? That's a
22 simple yes or no . Can you answer --
23 MR . McDERMOTT : In what respect?
25 Q . Do you think these are realistic

Vol . 5, Pg . 895
r
1 conditions? Do you think -- do you have any
2 reason to disagree with Dr . Rix?
3 A . I don't know -- I don't know why he picked
4 the realistic conditions that way . I have no
5 idea .
6 Q . Did you ask him?
7 A . No .
8 Q . He worked for you, right?
9 A . At one time .
10 Q. Yeah . And, in fact, this report was
11 done when you were director of --
12 A . Research .
13 Q . -- research, right? And so he worked
14 under you?
15 A . Right .
16 Q . Did you tell him then : There's
17 something wrong with your report?
18 A. No .
19 Q . I see .
20 Doctor, just to make it clear, you
21 have testified today, several times, that you kept
22 meeting Wynder and Hoffmann's conditions of
23 dropping nicotine and tar levels - when I say
24 "you," I mean Reynolds - over the years . Yet,
25 this document, that you have, would indicate that

Vol . 5, Pg . 896
1 the tar and nicotine levels for realistic smoking
2 are con -- are at the same level, at least of
3 whatever the measurement was in 1955, as they were
4 then ; isn't that true?
6 of the question . Misstates prior testimony .
7 MR . BLANCATO : Objection to the form .
8 THE WITNESS : Well, here again, this
9 is -- this is -- if you ran the '55 cigarette by
10 what Dr . Rix called realistic conditions, you
11 probably would have got numbers much higher . And
12 if you plotted them over the years, the curve
13 would still drop the way it is . All you'd have
14 done is move your baseline .
16 Q . Doctor, how can you say that? There's
17 different smoking compensation factors involved .
18 You talked about it in your report, why smokers
19 compensate and how they smoke differently .
20 You have no basis, do you, for making
21 a claim that realistic smoking conditions for the
22 same cigarettes in nineteen-fifty -- the
23 cigarettes that were in effect in 1955 were, in
24 fact, the number that Dr . Rix used in his report
based on the cigarette smoke in 1979 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 897
1 A . No, I don't .
the question .
THE WITNESS : The --
MR . SHELLER : Did you get the answer?
6 COURT REPORTER : Uh-huh . "No, I
7 don't ."
8 VIDEOGRAPHER : Mr . Sheller, we have
9 five minutes left on the videotape .
10 MR . SHELLER : What we'll do at this
11 point is let's -- let's mark the next document
12 we're going to refer to, which is the -- where's
13 that one?
14 MR . McDERMOTT : Just a point of order .
15 Have you now made arrangements to make this Table
16 exhibit?
17 MR . SHELLER : Yes .
18 MR . McDERMOTT : So it's going to be
19
21 MR . McDERMOTT : All right . Has that
22
23 MR . SHELLER : Not yet . All right .
25 1

Vol . 5, Pg . 898
4 record at 2 :22 p .m .
5 (Recess taken from 2 :22 p .m . to 2 :42
6 p .m .)
9 going back on the record at 2 :42 p .m .
11 Q . Dr . Rodgman, if Reynolds disagreed
12 with anything the FTC was doing about its method
13 for measuring tar and nicotine levels, did
14 Reynolds ever go to court to argue against what
15 the FTC was doing?
17 Q . Did they ever ask for a hearing before
18 the Federal Trade Commission about it?
20 Q . Well, we know that tobacco industry
21 and Reynolds are not shrinking violets, are they,
22 when it comes to litigation?
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form of Ln

~
J
N
24 the question . m
~
J
25 MR . BLANCATO : Object to the form of
P.

Vol . 5, Pg . 899
1 the question .
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
3 Q . Isn't that true?
5 the question .
6 BY MR . SHELLER :
7 Q . So if it's something they didn't like,
8 they wouldn't hesitate to take on the Federal
9 Trade Commission, would they?
11 the question .
13 question .
18 Q . Isn't it true they're taking the Food
19 and Drug Administration to court because the Food
20 and Drug Administration has said that nicotine is
21 a drug? And they're in court right here in North
22 Carolina, their own ballpark, right?

Vol . 5, Pg . 900
1 the question ; no foundation .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
4 Q . You don't know?
5 MR . McDERMOTT : Dr . Rodgman, just a
6 moment . Let me finish my objection .
7 Counsel well knows Dr . Rodgman was an
8 employee at Reynolds from 1954 to 1987 . He's here
9 to answer factual inquiries with respect to that
10 time period .
11 If you want to give little speeches
12 about what the tobacco industry has done, that's
13 fine ; but it has nothing to do with Dr . Rodgman or
14 the information in his possession . You're wasting
15 our time, and this line of questioning is
16 improper .
17 MR . SHELLER : Well, I don't think it's
18 improper . I think the jury is entitled to know
19 that the -- Reynolds can go to court in
20 North Carolina any time they wanted to if they
21 didn't like what the Federal Trade Commission was
22 doing . And they didn't .
24 the question . That's why God made closing
25 argument .

Vol . 5, Pg . 901
1 MR . SHELLER : Oh, yeah?
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
3 Q• Now, the next exhibit that I'd like to
4 mark is "Comments, Re FDA Nicotine Report
5 General" . Dated -- it says "Revised 11/2/95" .
6 Did you re -- prepare that report?
7 MR . SHELLER : Can you give the witness
8 a copy of it? I believe copies were made .
9 MR . BLANCATO : What's the exhibit
10 number on this?
11 MR . SHELLER : This will be 7 .
15 Q . That was in your documents that you
16 gave us, Doctor .
17 A . Yes, I prepared this .
18 Q . And what was the purpose of re --
19 preparing this?
20 A . I was asked to read the -- some report from
21 the FDA or some comments about the FDA, did I have
22 any thoughts of what they had written and anything
23 I might come up with that might be usable to
24 respond to them . And I -- as you know, it's sort
25 of choppy . I just put this together and --

~
r
J

Vol . 5, Pg . 902
Q• Well, who asked you to put this
together?
A. The folks at R & D .
Q. At Reynolds?
A . Yes .
Q . So this was prepared for Reynolds . So
you were doing work for Reynolds in 1995, then ; is
that correct?
A. No . I just did it for -- I wasn't paid for
10 it .
11 Q . You weren't paid for it . I see . But
12 you were doing work for them .
13 A. (Witness nods head .)
14 MR . MoDERMOTT : Object to the form of
15 the question . Misstates prior testimony .
17 Q . Now, you had testified that you were
18 not an expert on nicotine .
20 Q . Yet, Reynolds is asking you to give
21 the m a repor t on n i co ti ne ? Ln
N
~
~
22 A . Well, they knew that I had considerable m
~
23 background in the literature . And , as you notice , ~
N
CO
24 most of it is things pulled out of the literature .
25 I don't consider my -- still don't consider myself

Vol . 5, Pg . 903
1 an expert on nicotine .
2 Q . Would you look at what appears to
3 be -- I'm sorry . I have two different reports .
4 And I -- which one -- let me just see which one
5 you do have . Do you have the one marked 11/25/95
6 or 11/2/95?
7 A . Well, I've got them back-to-back here .
8 Q . Okay . Look at the one marked
9 11/25/95 .
10 A . Uh-huh .
11 MS . KNISELY : Actually, when they were
12 doing the copying, they put them, obviously,
13 together .
14 MR . SHELLER : That's all right .
15 MR . McDERMOTT : Do you want to keep it
16 as one exhibit? Or do you want 7A,'7B or --
17 MR . SHELLER : It doesn't matter .
18 MS . KNISELY : Why don't we make it 7A
19 and 7B .
20 MR . SHELLER : Okay . So the
21 comments .
22 (Plaintiff's Exhibits Numbered 7A and
23 7B were marked for identification)

Vol . 5, Pg . 904
1 Q . Now, Doctor, on page 1 of the revised
2 11/25 report, it states : (Reading)
3 Tobacco treated with
4 ammonia/steam (the process
5 used by RJR to reduce the
6 nicotine level in
7 high-nicotine tobaccos)
produces the following
9 changes in the tobacco .
10 So, remember I asked you before if you
11 knew what system RJR was using?
12 A . Yeah . I'd forgotten about that, sir .
13 Well, that case was the
14 denicotinization case, which has always been
15 ammonia and steam .
16 Q . I see .
17 And is there anything in these two
18 reports that you now disagree with or think is
19 incorrect?
20 A . It's been some time since I've looked at
21 them . As I say, they were sort of pulling things
22 together that might be of use in responding to the
23 FDA . And I'd have to read them . As you notice,
24 it's very choppy . It wasn't one of my better
25 efforts .

Vol . 5, Pg . 905
1 Q . Well, do you see the portion under
2 that, it says : (Reading)
3 In the mainstream, MS,
4 from the ammonia treated
5 tobacco?
6 A . Right .
7 Q . It says : (Reading)
8 On an equal weight of
9 tobacco smoke basis, the
10 nicotine delivery is lower in
11 the mainstream from the
12 processed tobacco than in the
13 mainstream from the control .
14 Is that correct?
15 A . That's usually the case with ammoniated
16 tobaccos .
17 Q. Right . Well, how did you measure
18 that, though?
19 A . Well, there's a set analytical procedure for
20 measuring nicotine in tobacco .
21 Q . How did you measure it in the
22 mainstream smoke? MS, is it -- what is that?
23 A . Mainstream smoke .
24 Q . I thought you can't measure it in
25 mainstream smoke? j

Vol . 5, Pg . 906
2 the question . You're misstating the witness'
3 testimony .
4 BY MR . SHELLER :
5 Q . Only by particulate?
6 A . Yeah, it's in the --
7 Q . Just the particulate matter .
8 A . It's the nicotine done by the FTC procedure .
9 Q . I see .
10 So, you don't know, then, whether
11 there's more nicotine in the smoke, then, because
12 you -- you'd have to calculate a value for that,
13 right?
14 A . I -- I don't get the message .
15 Q . If you treat tobacco with ammonia to
16 reduce the nicotine, this is your -- you're
17 reducing levels of nicotine, right, so you're
18 saying?
19 A . Right .
20 Q . And you're treating the tobacco with
21 ammonia, right?
22 A . Right .
23 Q . And there's still ammonia in the
24 tobacco that's treated, right, left in there?
A . A little bit .

Vol . 5, Pg . 907
1 Q . A little bit .
2 Do you know what portion, if any, of
3 that nicotine, after burning or pyrolysis, remains
4 in the smoke that's not picked up by the filter?
5 A . We're back to that again? As I said this
6 morning, the -- we looked at some very clever
7 chemists, both in our company and others, tried to
8 determine free nicotine, if that's what you're
9 trying to get, or nicotine, per se, in the vapor
10 phase that passes through the Cambridge filter
11 pad, and nobody has been able to find it .
12 And just to maybe round off and make
13 you feel better about it . If you have a reservoir
14 or a flask with nicotine in it that leads to a
15 Cambridge filter pad holder with a Cambridge
16 filter pad in it, and you vaporize the nicotine
17 and let it go along, so that when it hits the
18 Cambridge filter pad that it's about the same
19 temperature as the Cambridge filter pad in the FTC
20 procedure, you collect a lot of the nicotine on
21 the -- Cambridge filter pad . If you then check
22 what can go through the filter pad - because

Ln
~
J
23 there's nothing else to hold it, there's no acids ~
m
24 or anything - we can detect down to nanograms, 0.
J
N
W
25 micrograms of nicotine that will come through

Vol . 5, Pg . 908
1 that, and we could never find it with cigarette
2 smoke .
3 Q. I see . So anybody who finds it is
4 mistaken?
5 A . In the mainstream smoke that goes through to
6 the filter pad?
7 Q . Uh-huh .
8 A . I've never heard of anybody who's found it .
9 Q . I see .
10 A . As I said, it's been looked at by everybody
11 that I can think of .
12 Q . So you're saying there's no such thing
13 as free nicotine, the way I'm referring to it, in
14 this smoke that's not collected in the filter .
15 A . There is no nicotine that goes through the
16 Cambridge filter pad . And if it goes through the
17 Cambridge filter pad, it has to be nicotine by
18 itself . No salt .
19 Q. No salt . And you're saying, to your
20 knowledge, no nicotine by itself, free of salt,
21 does not go through that pad or it does?
22 A . That's right, it does not go through .
23 Q . It does not go through .
24 A . I guess that's --
i 25 Q . But you're not an expert on nicotine,

Vol . 5, Pg . 909
but you know that .
A . Well, I -- I know that -- I happened to have
some people that looked at that for about a year
and a half and tried all sorts of very fancy
methods .
The reason we did it is the -- some
people at Tennessee Eastman found out a way to
measure free ammonia in smoke, and we thought it
was adaptable to free nicotine . But it doesn't
10 work . They couldn't get it to work . Hoffmann
11 can't get it to work .
12 Q . Well, do you know any researchers at
Reynolds, like Dr . Robinson or -- who actually can

• 13
14 measure increased levels of nicotine -- I forget
15 what they're called -- indicators in the urine?
16 Cotinine levels, is that --
17 A . Well, a lot of the things that Dr . Robinson
18 has done on nicotine metabolism and so on were
19 done after I left . I don't know --
20 Q . You don't know about that?
21 A . I don't know about --
22 Q . So you don't know whether Dr . Robinson
23 has actually found that nicotine in
24 ammonia-treated tobacco has higher levels than in
25 the control without it?

Vol . 5, Pg . 910
3 the question .
4 THE WITNESS : I think you're jumping
5 from apples to oranges again, sir .
6 BY MR . SHELLER :
7 Q . I'm talking about the way Dr . Robinson
8 measures things .
9 A . I don't know . I just finished telling you, I
10 don't know how he measures .
11 Q . You don't know . You don't know . All
12 right .
13 A . I mean, if I don't know, I don't know . I'm
14 sorry, I can't -- I won't make up an answer for
15 you .
16 I understand . I understand .
17 MR . SHELLER : This is going to be the
18 next exhibit I refer to .
22 Q . Doctor, this is a report that you Ln

1~
23 prepared in 1956, September 28th . Do you recall ~
24 preparing that? It's called "RDR, 1956, No . 9" .
0 251 And it's Exhibit 8 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 911
1 MS . BRACHTL : Give us a second to
2 catch up with you .
4 BY MR . SHELLER :
5 Q . Did you prepare that report?
6 A . Oh, yes .
7 Q . So you recall it .
Would you please look at page 36 .
9 This was when you were a young chemist, right,
10 Doctor?
11 A . When I was young?
12 Q . Some 41 years ago .
13 A . Right .
14 MR . MCDERMOTT : We were all young .
16 Q . Now, Doctor, in the discussion it
17 says : (Reading)
18 The main interest in .the
19 presence of the polycyclic
20 aromatic hydrocarbons in
21 cigarette smoke condensate is
22 that many of these compounds
23 are known to be carcinogenic
24 to various species of
animals . The current

Vol . 5, Pg . 912
1 controversy concerning the
• 2 influence of cigarette
3 smoking on the increasing
4 incidence of cancer of the
lung in the human male (and
6 it lists a bunch of numbers] .
7 Animal data indicate there is
8 a carcinogenic factor in
9 cigarette smoke condensate .
10 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . You've
11 skipped over a portion of the --
12 MR . SHELLER : "However, animal
13 data" --
14 MR . BLANCATO : No, beyond that --
15 before that : "It has not yet been settled ."
16 MR . SHELLER : Where are you reading
17 f rom?
18 MR . BLANCATO : After the numbers in
19 the parentheses end .
20 MR . SHELLER : Oh . (Reading)
21 Has not yet been
22 settled -- the increasing
23 incidence of cancer of the
24 lung in the human male has
25 not yet been settled .

Vol . 5, Pg . 913
1 However, animal data indicate
2 that there is a carcinogenic
3 factor in cigarette smoke
4 condensate . This
5 carcinogenic factor resides
6 mainly in the neutral
7 fraction of the smoke
8 condensate and is produced
9 primarily by the pyrolysis --
10 THE WITNESS : Pyrolysis .
11 MR . SHELLER : (Reading)
12 -- pyrolysis of the
13 tobacco during the smoking
14 process .
15 Is that a true statement?
16 MR . McDERMOTT : Is that now, or was it
17 then?
19 Q. Was it then, and is it today?
20 A. Well, the carcinogenic factor that causes
21 skin cancer in mice is probably due to that . It's
22 true now as it was then .

Ln
Q. Would you change that any way today? ~
23 ~
~
m
24 A. The last two sentences? (Reading) ~
~
N
25 However, animal data kD

Vol . 5, Pg . 914
1 indicate there is a -- there
2 is a carcinogenic factor in
3 the cigarette smoke
4 condensate .
5 Q . You'd change that?
6 A . No, are those the two --
7 Q. No . Is there any part of it you'd
8 change?
9 A . No, I wouldn't change that . Because you can
10 still do it with mouse skin .
11 Q . Now, on the top of page 37, you say :
12 (Reading)
13 It has been demonstrated
S 14 that the carcinogenic
15 activity of the whole
16 condensate -- condensate, or
17 the hexane-soluble, neutral
18 fraction, is apparently much
19 greater than that due to the
20 individual carcinogenic
21 hydrocarbons, anthracene,
22 pyrene, chrysene?
23 A . Chrysene .
24 Q . (Reading)
• 25 1, 2-benz --

Vol . 5, Pg . 915
1 A . "Benzanthracene" .
2 Q . Do you want to help me here? I can't
3 pronounce these things .
4 A . m 3,4-benzpyrene" .
5 Q . (Reading)
6 -- present . Three --
7 these explanations of this
8 apparent anomaly appear
9 plausible at present .
10 And then it lists the following :
11 (Reading)
12 The carcinogenic
13 activity of the
14 hexane-soluble, neutral
15 fraction (or whole
16 condensate) is due mainly to
17 some hitherto unknown
18 powerfully carcinogenic
19 polycyclic aromatic
20 hydrocarbon .
21 A synergistic effect is
22 obtained from the known
23 hydrocarbons . This fact --
24 phenomenon has been described
25 by numerous workers in the

Vol . 5, Pg . 916
1 cause -- case of the
• 2 polycyclic aromatic
3 hydrocarbons .
4 Some compound present in
5 the neutral fraction of
6 cigarette smoke condensate is
7 behaving as a cocarcinogen
8 either for some compound in
9 cigarette smoke or for some
10 compound present as a
11 pollutant in air .
13 Do you agree with those? Anything you
14 disagree with?
15 A . Well, I now know, for example, that number 1
16 is wrong .
17 Q . Number 1 is wrong?
18 A . That the -- there was a proposal that,
19 because they could not explain the fact with the
20 known polycyclic hydrocarbons that would cause
21 tumors on mouse skin, they couldn't explain what
22 they were getting with cigarette smoke condensate,
23 that Dr . Wynder and Dr . Wright - Dr . Wright .
24 happened to be my major professor - had proposed
25 that there is some other polycyclic hydrocarbon in

Vol . 5, Pg . 917
1 smoke that's as potent as benzo[a]pyrene, at --
2 but present at 25/30 times the level of
3 benzo [a] pyrene .
4 Q . We went through that before . So this
5 is the same thing before?
6 A . Well, no, this is different .
7 The -- or there was a polycyclic
8 hydrocarbon, which was 30 times more potent than
9 benzo[a]pyrene, present at the same level as
10 benzo[a]pyrene . And Dr . Wright, who I say was my
11 major professor, spent 18 months looking for what
12 they call the super carcinogen and, of course,
13 never found it .
14 But then, I say, looking back at what
15 we know now, back to 1956 -- and in the mid '70s
16 the group at USA -- USDA in Athens, Georgia, under
17 Dr . Chordik did the most complete study of
18 polycyclic hydrocarbons in smoke ever done and
19 could account for the whole fraction . And there
20 was no compound potent, like benzpyrene, present
21 at 30 times the level or no super carcinogen .
22 Q. Well --
23 A . So that is, you know, a premise that was in
24 the works at that time, and went down the drain
25 subsequently .

Vol . 5, Pg . 918
1 Q . I see . Is two and three correct?
2 A . The --
3 Q• Synergistic effect .
4 A . In a way it is . Because what was found
5 shortly after 1956 -- for example, if you have
6 benzpyrene at a given amount and paint mice with
7 it, you get a certain number of tumors . But then,
8 if you paint another group of mice with the same
9 amount of benzpyrene but with a non-tumorigenic
10 polycyclic, like anthracene, the tumorigenicity
11 goes down . In other words, it's not synergism,
12 it's inhibition . And, of course, this was not
13 known when I wrote this .
14 Q . How about synergistic effects? How
15 about --
16 A . That has never been demonstrated with
17 polycyclic hydrocarbons .
18 Q . Has it been demonstrated with other
19 substances and stuff?
21 Q . Well, did Reynolds, to your knowledge,
22 ever do any studies on animals, either by contract
23 or otherwise, to see if the various constituents
24 of smoke, when mixed together in different
25 mixtures --

Vol . 5, Pg . 919
r
1 A . No, we didn't .
2 Q . -- create a synergistic effect?
3 A . No, we didn't .
4 Q . You didn't . Do you know if anybody
5 did?
6 A . Oh, yes .
7 Q . Who?
8 A. Dr . Wynder .
9 Q . And what did he say?
10 A . Well --
11 Q . He says it does, doesn't it?
12 A . It doesn't say synergism .
13 Q . It doesn't? So if Dr . Wynder and
14 Dr . Hoffmann agree with you, you're going to have
15 a problem with it?
16 A . No, I don't have a problem with it . Because
17 they -- what they did -- at the time they did the
18 experiment, there were, I don't know, a dozen
19 polycyclic hydrocarbons which had some degree of
20 tumorigenicity to mouse skin . And they figured
21 out how much was in the smoke condensate . And
22 they added -- and I forget whether they doubled Ln

~
~
23 the amount or tripled it . I forgot . I think it m
~
~
24 was doubled . w
Ln
251 In other words, if they had X

Vol . 5, Pg . 920
1 nanograms of benzpyrene, they put 2X . And they
2 said, when you painted the skin of the mice with
3 this enhanced thing, you got double the tumors --
4 not quite double, but --
5 Q . But that was an enhancement .
6 A . -- but -- yeah .
7 The thing was, it was done by four
other laboratories and nobody could confirm it .
10 Well how about -- do you know what
11 the -- what do you understand, from your
12 background, are the tumor promoters in cigarette
13 smoke?
• 14 A . Well, the tumor promoters were -- the first
15 group that was proposed were the phenols .
16 Q . Are they still -- some of them still
17 in smoke?
18 A . Well, I don't -- yeah . They're always in
19 smoke .
20 Q. I see .
21 A . And the thing was, as I said yesterday, that
22 several people have shown that, if you have a
23 smoke condensate intact and you paint it on mice
24 and get a certain number of tumors, if you then
• 25 prepare that same smoke condensate in a way that

Vol . 5, Pg . 921
1 strips out the phenols from the smoke, paint that
2 on mice, you get the same number of tumors . Which
3 means that there's no -- the promoter, that they
4 claimed, is not promoting .
5 Q . I see .
6 A . And Dr . Van Duuren at -- I think he's at
7 New York University -- showed that actually the
8 phenol, which some people call promoters, actually
9 inhibited the behavior of poly -- of
10 benzo [a] pyrene .
11 Q . Is nicotine a tumor promoter?
13 Q . You don't know that?
14 A . Huh-uh .
15 Q . Did you know that it was Dr . Minna
16 from a medical school in Texas, who was funded by
17 the Council for Tobacco Research, concluded that
18 nicotine was a tumor promoter?
19 A . No, I did not .
20 Q . You didn't know that .
21 What are the other tumor promoters?
22 A . There are a couple of the indoles --
23 substituted indoles in smoke that have been shown
24 to be tumor -- ~J
W
J
25 Q . How about nitrosamines? Is that a

Vol . 5, Pg . 922
1 carcinogen or a tumor promoter?
2 A . It's a tumorigen, yeah .
3 Q . It's actually not just a promoter? It
4 actually causes cancer?
5 A . Right .
6 Q . Do you know if anybody has painted
7 nitrosamines on animals and gotten tumors beyond
the skin? In other words, of the lung and other
9 parts of the animal's body .
10 A . Usually they don't -- because of the fact
11 that painting -- skin painting with nitrosamines
12 has -- but many of them done and rather fruitless,
13 they don't get tumors on the skin --
14 Q . I didn't ask about skin tumors .
15 A . -- and, as you pointed out, they do get them
16 elsewhere .
17 Q . I see .
18 A . So most people who study nitrosamines don't
19 paint them, they feed it .
20 Q . They feed it .
21 Well, if you -- how about painting --

cn
22 has Reynolds ever looked at humans to find out, -J
N
m
23 those who smoke, if they're, you know, getting AD .
-J
24 those nitrosamines in their mouth, whether it o
251 causes tumors in the lungs or someplace else?

Vol . 5, Pg . 923
1 A . No . Reynolds has not done that kind of work .
2 Q . Anybody? In the tobacco industry?
4 foundation .
6 BY MR . SHELLER :
7 Q . Wouldn't that be logical and important
8 to look into?
11 foundation .
14 Q . Your answer?
15 A. No . Well, there have been speculations that
16 they're causative, but nobody's shown it .
17 Q. I see . Nobody's studied it for the
18 humans .
19 A . Not with humans . But he also --
20 Q . Well, we know if we put them on a
21 mouse it will get cancer of the lung, right?
22 A . Yeah . But it's not the type caused by --
23 it's mostly attributed to smoking .
24 Q. I see . Adenomas, though, right?
25 A . Well, you get mice that are --

Vol . 5, Pg . 924
1 Q . What kind of cancers do they get of
2 the lung?
3 MR . McDERMOTT : Counselor, you keep
cutting the witness off . Would you let him finish
5 his answer .
6 MR . SHELLER : I'm letting him finish .
7 MR . MCDERMOTT : No, you're not . The
8 record will reflect that . Let him finish .
9 THE WITNESS : Will you let me finish?
10 If you won't, I'm leaving .
11 MR . SHELLER : I'm letting you finish .
12 THE WITNESS : I'm finished .
13 MR . SHELLER : Good .
15 Q . Doctor, at the -- sir, as I understand
16 it, then, you know of no testing that Reynolds has
17 done to take, say, a tumor promoter and
18 nitrosamines and test them together to see if they
19 increase the risk of cancer in animals .
20 A. No . I don't -- I don't know -- I don't think
21 they've ever done it . Unless they've done it
22 since I've left .
23 Q . Now, Doctor, at the last paragraph
24 here you say : (Reading)
25 Since it is now well

Vol . 5, Pg . 925
established that cigarette
smoke does contain several
polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons --
A . Where are we?
Q. Page 37 . (Reading)
In considering the
potential and actual
carcinogenic -- (you say]
10 actual carcinogenic activity
11 of a number of these
12 compounds, a method of either
13 complete removal or almost
14 complete removal of these
15 compounds from cigarette
16 smoke is required .
17 Do you now disagree with that view that
18 you had in 1956?
19 A. No . You got to remember, this was written
20 when there was a big controversy about all this,
21 saying that it would be opportune to remove -- to
22 cut down the argument and the bad press we were
23 getting .
24 Q . Well, you don't say that there . You
25 say -- you were a young scientist then, trying to

Vol . 5, Pg . 926
1 do the right thing, right? You weren't worried
2 about the controversy ; you were worried about what
3 was right, weren't you?
4 A . Well, the other thing, too, sir, is that,
5 when I wrote something like that, the people knew
6 what I was talking about .
7 Q . They did . 1956 .
8 By the way, I looked in your
9 background . I saw, when you were a young man, you
10 taught Sunday School, didn't you?
11 A . I did?
12 That's what it said, somewheres . You
13 didn't teach Sunday School? Do you belong to
14 church?
15 A . Yes .
16 Q . Which church?
17 A . If it's any of your business, I'm an
18 Episcopalian .
19 Q . Do you believe in God?
20 MR . BLANCATO : Objection . This is --
22 Q . Well, Doctor, I'm just asking you . If
23 you know that something is a carcinogen, don't Ln

N
~
24 you -- you don't believe anymore that it's N
~
~
* 25 required to be removed -- complete removal or ~
N

Vol . 5, Pg . 927
1 almost complete removal of these compounds from
• 2 cigarette smoke is required? You don't believe
3 that anymore? Is that true?
4 A . Well, I believe in what we have done . If you
5 look at what we have done, we have reduced it
6 substantially in cigarette smoke over the years .
7 And the fact that that has been done has gotten,
8 actually, commendation from the Surgeon General .
9 Q . I see .
10 You got a letter to that effect from
11 him?
12 A . No, it's in the Surgeon General's report .
13 Q . Oh, I see . Now --
15 MR . McDERMOTT : Are we moving to a new
16 exhibit?
17 MR . SHELLER : Yes . We're moving to --
18 THE WITNESS : If you'll excuse me, I'm
19 going to go to the restroom .
20 MR . SHELLER : Sure .
22 record at 3 :15 p .m . . Ln
FA
J
23 (Recess taken from 3 :15 p .m . to 3 :24 m
24 p .m . )
25 VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going back on

Vol . 5, Pg . 92 8
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
3 Q. Doctor, I'm going to give you a lette r
4 that you wrote to Dr . Hoover, Dr . Kenneth Hoover,
5 in July -- on July 25th, 1962 . And this would be
6 Exhibit 9 .
8 marked for identification )
9 (Discussion off the record )
10 MR . SHELLER : While they're waiting ,
11 I'll just -
13 Q . Kenneth Hoover is who ?
14 A . He was the director of research when I came
15 to Reynolds, and I guess he was director till 1965
16 when Dr . Willard Bright took his place .
17 Q . Now, you were making a submission of
18 abstracts of papers to be presented at the 16th
19 Tobacco Conference Research Conference, in
20 Richmond, Virginia, in September 1962 .
21 A . Right .
22 Q. And you had to get permission fro m
23 Dr . Hoover as to what you could present ; is that
24 correct ?
25 A . Yes .

Vol . 5, Pg . 929
Q . And in it -- and I take you down to
2 the third paragraph . It says : (Reading)
3 The findings presented
4 in this manuscript have been
5 described in RDR, 1962,
6 No . 14 .
7 And you say : (Reading)
8 The discussion given in
9 the RDR of the testing of
10 indoles and carbazoles for
11 carcinogenic activity has, of
12 course, been deleted from the
13 manuscript, even though all
14 of these tests gave negative
15 results . The review of other
16 heterocyclic nitrogen
17 compounds identified in
18 tobacco smoke, example, [and
19 again, my pronunciation is
20 not great] pyrido indole
21 methyl-something . Indole
22 dibenz acridine -- [on and
23 on] was omitted from our
24 manuscript because of the
- 25 reported carcinogenic

Vol . 5, Pg . 930
1 activity of the latter three
2 compounds .
3 A . Right .
4 Q . Why did you feel compelled to have to
5 omit any compound that could be carcinogenic from
6 this presentation?
7 A . Well, we didn't omit any, we just didn't
8 discuss them in the presentation, their biological
9 activity in the presentation .
10 Q . Well, why didn't you want to do that?
11 A . Well, as I explained to you before . If you
12 look at the last ones, dibenz[a,h,]acridine,
dibenz [a, j] acridine and dibenz [c, g] carbazole . If
• 13
14 you notice the date on this is 1962 . These were
15 the three aza-arenes that had been reported in
16 1960 by Benjamin Van Duuren . And as I said
17 earlier, they had been described as tumorigenic to
18 mouse skin . But they're -- already some question
19 as to whether they were in cigarette smoke .
20 And as I said, Dr . Wynder, if you look
21 at his book and some of his writing in his review
22 articles, they couldn't find those . And then,
23 since then, seven other studies done in Germany,
24 Japan, the United States, they can't find them .
25 So -- and the other thing is, sir,

Vol . 5, Pg . 931
1 this was a -- not a biological conference, it was
2 a chemist conference . And they were primarily
3 interested in chemical analysis, chemical
4 identification, and not on the discussion of
5 biological issues .
6 Q . Well, "May we" -- you say, "May we
7 submit the manuscript to Tobacco Science for
8 Publication?"
9 You were submitting it, not just to
10 the conference, but you were submitting it to
11 Tobacco Science for Publication . Weren't you
12 planning to do that?
13 A . Yes . And it was published .
14 Q . It was published . With the omission
15 of any compound that was thought to have --
16 A. No .
17 Q . -- carcinogenic activity in cigarette
18 smoke .
19 A . Not compounds we had identified .
20 Q . Not ones you had identified .
21 A . That other people had discussed . And I say

Ln
r
J
22 here, Tobacco Science was primarily a chemical ~
m
23 journal . ~
J
J
24 Q . Well, how about -- were there any of
25 these compounds that you agree were still -- are

Vol . 5, Pg . 932
1 still in tobacco smoke and are carcinogenic?
2 A . The norharmane and harmane, the first two
there, are, if you will, borderline tumorigens,
4 and they're in tobacco smoke .
5 Q . So, your description, then, was you
6 were going to admit -- omit even the ones that
7 even today you agree are borderline carcinogenic?
8 A . Omit discussion .
9 Q . Was that the standard practice at --
10 MR . McDERMOTT : Excuse me .
11 Dr . Rodgman, had you finished your answer?
12 THE WITNESS : I guess .
13 MR . McDERMOTT : Okay . I'm sorry .
15 Q . Was that the standard practice, to
16 omit any compound -- discussion of compounds at
17 any of these Tobacco Science conferences that were
18 carcinogenic compounds at that time?
19 A . At this particular one, it was . This
20 conference .
21 Q . How about after that?

Ln
22 A . Well, I'm sure you've mulled through all my ~
~
m
23 reports on the composition of smoke, including the ~
~
24 ones on the polycyclic hydrocarbons, and so on and co
~ 251 so forth . By sometime in 1965, we had presented

Vol . 5, Pg . 933
1 almost all of that stuff at different conferences .
2 Carcinogenic or non-carcinogenic, inhibitory,
3 promoting, and --
4 Q . How about publishing them?
5 A . Well, by the time we got to presenting
6 them -- the whole thing -- are you listening?
7 Q. Yes . I didn't forget . I'm here .
8 A . That -- when we determined the polycyclics
9 and identified them, we then set out on a -- as
10 you know, a series of studies of ways to reduce
11 polycyclics in cigarette smoke, which involved the
12 extraction procedure I mentioned before, the
,~ 13 addition of combustion additives, the use of

I I_I I
14 filter tip additives, the effect of things in
15 paper and so on . And one of the major reasons we
16 had not published too much about the polycyclics,
17 since our work was fairly sophisticated, that --
18 this would have been a pretty good clue to anybody
19 that, if Reynolds knows that much about
20 polycyclics, they're probably doing something to
21 reduce it, and what are they doing?
22 As I told you before, many of the
23 methods that -- where we were looking at selective
24 reduction of class of compounds, whether it be
25 polycyclics or phenols or what have you, ended up

Vol . 5, Pg . 934
1 in causing other problems that -- you know, you
2 solve one problem, or partly solve it, and then
3 you raise several others . And by the time we
4 finished all that work and went to the premise
5 that, if we're going to do something with smoke,
6 let's lower everything uniformly, or as nearly
7 uniformly as we can . Most of what we had found
8 had all -- was already published . I think, by the
9 time we got to that point in time, in the -- '65,
10 or whenever it was, there was only one compound
11 that I had found that was not in the literature,
12 and I wasn't too sure of that one either .
13 Q. That was carcinogenic?
14 A . I don't know -- it may be borderline
15 carcinogenic .
16 Q. What one was that?
17 A . A compound called cholanthrene .
18 Q . Did you ever publish on that?
19 A. No . It appeared in something else, shortly
20 thereafter .
21 Q . How long thereafter?

Ln
A . Oh, I don't know . A year or two . You ~
22 ~
N
m
23 usually wouldn't -- ~
~
Ln
24 Q . Doctor -- m
25 MR . BLANCATO : Finish your answer .

Vol . 5, Pg . 935
MR . McDERMOTT : Doctor, finish your
answer .
MR . SHELLER : A year or two
thereafter, I think he said .
THE WITNESS : But, here again, you
know, by this time, there were -- by 1965, there
were probably a hundred polycyclics in smoke .
'What more would one do?
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . I see .
11 Doctor, wouldn't it have been
12 appropriate for Reynolds to say : There are
13 carcinogens in tobacco smoke --
16 Q . -- and here they are, that we have -
17 that have been reported by others? Rather than
18 saying, publicly : We're going to deny that we
19 know about them .
20 MR . BLANCATO : Object to form .

! c„
N
22 the question . Assumes facts not in evidence . ~
m
23 THE WITNESS : I don't understand . ~
! 251 Q . Well, why didn't -- is the only reason

Vol . 5, Pg . 936
,
1 Reynolds never told the public that there are
2 carcinogens in our smoke and published it was
3 because others, outside of the tobacco industry,
4 had published that information and, therefore,
5 there was no need for Reynolds to acknowledge it?
6 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection, no
7 foundation .
8 THE WITNESS : Well, as I say, we
9 eventually did acknowledge it . And I gave it four
10 times .
12 THE WITNESS : Twice in Georgia, and
0 13 over here in Greensboro, North Carolina, and once
14 here at Wake Forest University .
16 Q . In a publication?
17 A . No, a presentation . As I say, everything had
18 been published by that time . But --
19 Q . When did you -- there were four times
20 you did this . When was it?
21 A . I think -- the first time, I think, was '65,-
22 somewhere in there .
23 Q . So you agreed that there were
24 carcinogens in tobacco smoke? Ln

N
25 A . Well, as -- as I've said, many, many times 1

Vol . 5, Pg . 937
I
1 here, sir, there are carcinogens in tobacco smoke
2 that are carcinogenic to mouse skin .
3 Q . Doctor, I'm going to give you a
4 report . We're going to refer to this as Exhibit
5 10 .
6 MS . EASON : May we please have a
7 description, please --
11 Q . This is entitled "The Smoking .and
12 Health Problem, A Critical and Objective Appraisal
• 13
14
of RDM, 1963, No . 4 ." The copy where it's marked
"voided by KHH" .
16 MR . McDERMOTT : Do you want to do the
17 same thing? Do you want to do an A and B here?
18 Or you're not going to use .
19 MS . KNISELY : I don't know if we'll
20 get to the next one, but we can just give it a
21 different number .
22 MR . McDERMOTT : If memory serves, I
23 think these are already in the record for this
24 deposition from the first session .
• 25 MS . KNISELY : Not that particular one .

Vol . 5, Pg . 938
I
1 MR . LEE : Only in the boxes, not
2 individual . I talked about it . It was never
3 introduced . And they're not on top --
4 MS . KNISELY : It's not been attached,
not that particular one .
6 MR . McDERMOTT : All right . I thought
7 it was introduced in the Minnesota deposition, the
8 Minnesota portion, was it not?
9 MS . KNISELY : No . The one attached to
10 the subpoena -- the Arch subpoena was ; but that
11 did not have the "voided KHH° on it .
12 MR . McDERMOTT : All right .
14 Q . Doctor, you, in this -- do you recall
15 this report?
16 A . Oh, yes .
17 Q . And this -- what do you mean by
18 "voided by KHH°?
19 A . Mr . Hoover voided it .
20 Q . Meaning what?
21 MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . Asked and

Ln
N
22 answered . This was all gone into -- ~
~
m
23 BY MR . SHELLER : IN
~
~
24 He rejected it ; is that correct? ~
MR . McDERMOTT : Objection . Asked and

Vol . 5, Pg . 939
1 answered . This was all gone into at length by
2 Mr . Lee .
3 BY MR . SHELLER :
4 Q . All right . The -- page 7 of the
5 report -- and before I get to that, let me
6 introduce another exhibit, 'cause I'm going to ask
7 you to refer to them together . This is a 1962 --
8 it says "RDM 1963 No . 1," also voided by KHH .
9 MR . McDERMOTT : I believe that's
10 Number 4 .
11 MR . SHELLER : Previously Number 4?
12 MS . KNISELY : No, I don't think it is .
13 THE WITNESS : The one that's got
14 "first" on the top is number 1, 1963 . The one
15 that's got second --
16 MR . McDERMOTT : Yeah, but let me see
17 this one .
18 THE WITNESS : It's the short one?
19 MR . McDERMOTT : Is that a "one" or a
20 "four"?
21 THE WITNESS : That's a "one" and this
22 one's the "four" .

Un
23 MR . McDERMOTT : Okay, I'm sorry . I r
J
F-'
0
24 misspoke . ~
~
~
~ 25IBY MR . SHELLER : Ln

Vol . 5, Pg . 940
1 Q . Now, Doctor, I want you to look at
2 page 4 of what's number 1, research report 1 .
3 MR . BLANCATO : Are you going to mark
4 this short one as an exhibit?
8 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . If you look at E, the "Evidence to
10 Date m on report number 1, you say : (Reading)
11 Obviously the amount of
12 evidence accumulated to
13 indict cigarette smoke as a
14 health hazard is
15 overwhelming . The evidence
16 challenging this indictment
17 is scant . Attempts to shift
18 the blame to other factors
19 (example, air pollutants)
20 necessitates acceptance of
21 data similar to those denied
22 in the cigarette smoke case .
23 MR . MeDERMOTT : I'm not going to
24 object at this time, but I will point out this was
25 covered in the first session of the deposition .

Vol . 5, Pg . 941
r
1 MR . SHELLER : Not this particular
2 statement .
3 MR . HOLTON : Oh, yes, it was .
4 MR . SHELLER : You'll see, when I get
5 to it .
6 MR . HOLTON : Not the variation .
7 MR . SHELLER : Right, not the
8 variation .
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . Now, Doctor, that's what you said in
11 your first report . And then, if you look at page
12 second (sic) of your -- this one, 1963 report,
13 number 4, when you -- what did you do? Did you
14 resubmit it to Mr . -- to Dr . Hoover?
15 A . No . No .
16 MS . EASON : What page are you on?
17 MR . SHELLER : Page 7 .
18 THE WITNESS : If you had read the
19 deposition, you'll find why there are two . You
20 haven't read the deposition .
21 MR . SHELLER : Yes, I have .
22 THE WITNESS : Well, do you know why
23 there are two, then?
24 MR . SHELLER : I may not remember it
25 accurately, I'm sorry .

Vol . 5, Pg . 942
1 THE WITNESS : Well, if you notice, one
2 is very brief ; no citations . And the reason they
3 were written this way is, I knew management --
4 scientific management would appreciate the longer
5 version annotated, and so on and so forth . And
6 the other one, if it marched on outside of the
7 research department, that people wouldn't want to
8 have a whole bunch of numbers rattling around, and
9 a long bibliography, and so on and so forth . So
10 one is a -- if you will -- a brief summary of the
11 other one .
13 Q . Well, Doctor, look at the top of page
14 1 of the report number 4 .
15 A . Uh-huh .
16 Q• You say on the top of the page, first
17 paragraph : (Reading)
18 This report is an
19 extension of a companion
20 memorandum, which presented
21 my position as briefly and as
22 concisely as possible . The

Ln
~
~
23 two memoranda have identical m
~
24 schematic organizations . As Ln
00
25 mentioned before, if

Vol . 5, Pg . 943
r
1 requested, a thorough,
2 fully-documented exposition
3 of the ideas will be
4 prepared .
5 Is that why this -- is there any
6 inconsistency between these two?
7 A. No . As I say, one was a shorter version of
8 the other . And, if you notice, they fairly well
9 follow the same plot and --
10 Q . Well, on page 7 -- could you look at
11 page 7 of the report 4 . "The Evidence to Date,"
12 which is now being amplified in your report 4, you
13 say : (Reading)
14 Obviously the amount of
15 evidence accumulated to
16 indict cigarette smoke as a
17 health hazard is
18 overwhelming .
19 A . Yes, I said that . And I explained it before .
20 Q. Right . Now you say : (Reading)
21 However the evidence
22 from epidemiological,
23 pathological, biological and
24 chemical studies . Supporting
25 the proposition that lung

Vol . 5, Pg . 944
1 cancer is caused by or
2 associated with cigarette
3 smoke, is paralleled by
4 similar evidence supporting
5 the proposition that lung
6 cancer is caused by or
7 associated with air
8 pollutants . In some
9 instances, the evidence seems
10 to be stronger in support of
11 cigarette smoke as a
12 causative or associated
13 factor ; in other instances
14 the evidence seems to be
15 stronger in support of air
16 pollutants as a causative or
17 associated factor .
18 (You then go on and say]
19 Any criticism leveled at the
20 lung cancer-cigarette smoke
21 proposition, statistical
22 studies cannot prove
23 cause-and-effect
24 relationships between two
25 factors, mice are not men,

Vol . 5, Pg . 945
y
1 (criticism of biological
2 evidence) .
3 You say : (Reading)
4 Metaplasia and
5 hyperplasia do not become
6 cancerous (a criticism of the
7 pathological evidence) ; and
8 no experimental evidence to
9 show that any cigarette smoke
10 constituent is carcinogenic
11 to human lung tissue at the
12 level present in cigarette
13 smoke (a criticism of the
14 chemical evidence) is equally
15 applicable to the lung
16 cancer-air pollutant
17 proposition .
18 Is that how you amplified it then?
19 A . Well, as you can see, one is much longer than
20 the other . And, of course, as I explained before,
21 that my concern was that -- when I said evidence Ln

~_j
_j
22 was overwhelming, is all we were hearing was one ~
m
23 side of the arqument . And this is late '62/early tj
24 '63 .
251 And as I said before, my concern was

Vol . 5, Pg . 946
1 we had developed a pretty good reputation for
2 being good chemists . And what I wanted to do, and
3 what this is really aimed at, is persuade
4 management to let us get into biological work .
5 Q. Right .
6 A . And -- because I felt, with the competence of
7 the people we had or people we could acquire, that
8 if we could be that good in chemistry - and we
9 were considered very good in chemistry r then we
10 could do the same thing with the biological
11 studies . And already, by this time, in 1963, we
12 had demonstrated in-house -- unfortunately we
13 hadn't published some of it . But many of the
14 assertions in the -- that -- in this overwhelming
15 evidence was wrong .
16 Q . All right, sir .
17 Doctor, look at your recommendations
18 on page 14 . And you say : (Reading)
19 Recommendations : After
20 consideration of the evidence
21 available on the cigarette Ln

r
~
22 smoke-health problem and the ~
23 Company's obligation to its
24 customers [and you have an
asterisk there] it is

Vol . 5, Pg . 947
1 interesting to note remarks
2 like "Why don't 'they' do
3 something about the liquor
4 industry? After all, there
5 are an estimated four million
6 Americans classified as
7 alcoholics . Alcoholism not
8 only is a health hazard to
9 the drinker but also causes
10 untold anguish to his
11 family ." Or "What about the
12 meat-packing industry and the
• 13
14
supposed relationship of
saturated animal fat to
15 cholesterol-caused
16 circulatory disorders and
17 heart disease? After all,
18 many more persons die of
19 heart disease than lung
'20 cancer ." These remarks [and
21 this is your statement] may
22 have some justification, but
23 attempts to minimize our
24 obligations by pointing an
• 25 accusing finger at others is

Vol . 5, Pg . 948
1 no solution to the cigarette
2 smoke-health problem!
3 A . Right .
4 Q . Do you agree with that today?
5 A . Yeah .
6 Q . Then you go on to say, after you say,
7 "To its customers, stockholders, and employees :"
8 (Reading)
9 It is recommended that
10 facilities, animals, and
11 personnel (where necessary)
12 be acquired to study
0 13 biological cigarette smoke,
14 tobacco, tobacco and
15 additives .
16 This recommendation has
17 been made previously by
18 Teague, by Rodgman [and it
19 lists -- you list all these
20 dates] . Data from such
21 studies may be invaluable, if
22 government restrictions are
23 imposed as a result of the
24 conclusions of the Surgeon
25 General's Committee on

Vol . 5, Pg . 949
,
1 Smoking and Health . It is, I
2 believe, more urgent than
3 ever that we acquire
4 dexterity in biological
5 techniques .
6 Do you still agree with that today?
7 A . Yes . And of course we do have biological
8 things in place, now, some of them .
9 Q . And between 1970 and '84 you had none,
10 right?
11 A . Well, we did a lot of contracting outside .
12 Q . I see .
13 Then you say, on page 15 : (Reading)
14 It is recommended that
15 data already available on
16 physiologically active
17 cigarette smoke components,
18 example, polycyclic
19 hydrocarbons, phenols be
20 published . It is recommended
21 that analytical procedures
22 concerning such components be
23 published . These
24 recommendations are made
25 because I believe they

Vol . 5, Pg 950
1 t represent the best answer to
2 the questions : What effect
3 would immediate publication
4 of these data have on this
5 Company's economic status?
6 What would be the effect on
7 this Company of not
8 publishing these data now,
9 but being required at some
10 future date to disclose such
11 data, possibly in the
12 unfavorable atmosphere of a
13 lawsuit?
14 What happened? Did they agree with you?
15 Did Mr . Hoover -- Mr . Hoover voided this, didn't
16 he?
17 A . Right .
18 MR . McDERMOTT : Counselor, I don't
19 mean to rain on your parade, but this has been
20 covered already, and this is getting repetitive
21 and quite time consuming .
22 MR . SHELLER : By the way, I'm going to
23 give you a letter that Dr . Teague wrote to
24 Dr . Hoover .
251 MS . KNISELY : If you want to mark

Vol . 5, Pg . 951
1 these next A and B?
2 THE WITNESS : By the way it's not
3 Dr . Hoover, it's Mr . Hoover .
4 MR . SHELLER : Mr . Hoover . All right .
5 THE WITNESS : Believe me, there's a
6 difference .
7 MR . SHELLER : That's obvious .
8 MS . KNISELY : One is typewritten and
9 one is handwritten, if you want to mark the next
10 number A and B .
11 MR . SHELLER : Okay . What number are
12 we up to? 12 A and B .
13 MS . EASON : And which is the A and
14 which is .the B?
15 MR . SHELLER : A is the typewritten
16 version, the letter from Dr . Teague to Kenneth
17 Hoover -
18 MR . McDERMOTT : This is 11 A and B?
19 MR . SHELLER : Right . And 11 -- 12 .
20 And the handwritten is -- 12 is the handwritten
21 copy by Dr . Bruce .
23 (Plaintiff's Exhibits Numbered 12A and
24 12B were marked for identification)

Vol . 5, Pg . 952
1 Q . Now, Doctor, Dr . Teague was your
2 supervisor, right?
3 A . At one time .
4 Q . At one time .
5 And what was he at this time, in 1963?
6 A . He was manager -- 1963, he was manager of the
7 chemical research division . He was my boss .
8 Q . And he says : (Reading)
9 I believe he has a right
10 to be heard, despite my
11 honest disagreement with him
12 on certain minor points .
13 Accordingly, I recommend that
14 the reports be accepted and
15 distributed . I also might
16 suggest that copies be made
17 available to members of our
18 legal department .
19 And he's referring to "RDM, 1963, No . 1"
20 and °RDM, 1963, No . 4 .°
21 A . Right .
22 MS . EASON : For the record, which
23 version were you reading? ~

0,
00
24 MR . SHELLER : I was reading the typed
251 version .

Vol . 5, Pg . 953
MS . EASON : Thank you .
2 BY MR . SHELLER :
Q . And even though Dr . Teague supported
you, he -- Hoover rejected it too . Did Hoover
tell you why?
A . He called me in -- actually, they were all
typed and of course had been assigned a number --
you might as well hear the whole story .
And in those days we didn't have Xerox
10 copiers . We had an original and five or six
11 carbons . And he had the typed version on his desk
12 and a couple of copies of my -- if you notice,
13 this typing on the ones we just finished, it's
14 pretty terrible . And I have to -- I was never
15 much of a typist . I did these at home .
16 And he said, "Alan, I'm not going to
17 issue these ." And he didn't say why . And I
18 noticed the copies on his desk . I didn't know if
19 there were two copies or three copies there with
20 the "voided KHH" on it . And I just reached over
21 and I said, "Okay, if you're not, then these are
22 mine," and walked out .
23 So these -- I think, if you look in
24 the list of RDM's, you'll find a place there where
25 these two are voided .

Vol . 5, Pg . 954
1 Q . So he really didn't tell you much, he
2 just voided them?
3 A. No .
4 Q . All right .
5 Doctor, I'm going to give you a report
6 that you wrote in 1964 that wasn't voided by
7 Hoover, apparently . It's an analysis of cigarette
8 smoke condensate, summary of an eight-year study .
9 MR . McDERMOTT : Hang on . Do we have
10 copies of that?
11 MS . KNISELY : Yes, you do .
12 MR . HOLTON : We don't have that one
• 13
14
copied, do we?
MS . KNISELY : Yes, you do .
17 Q . Doctor, would you please refer to --
18 this is RDR number 1964, Plaintiff's Exhibit 13 .
22 Q . And I'm referring you now to page 56,
23 entitled "Discussion" .
24 You start a rather lengthy discussion,
25 and you say : (Reading)

Vol . 5, Pg . 955
1 During the past decade
2 and a half, considerable
3 scientific evidence has been
4 presented which relates
5 tobacco smoking, particularly
6 cigarette smoking, to
7 specific diseases . This
8 evidence consists of four
9 types : Namely, statistical,
10 pathological, biological and
11 chemical . Our studies have
12 been concerned solely with
0 13 the latter - the chemical
14 composition of smoke . For a
15 consistent picture to be
16 painted of the tobacco
17 smoke-disease problem, the
18 evidence from each discipline
19 must agree with that from the
20 other three . With respect to
21 the composition of tobacco
22 smoke, are our chemical
23 evidence and the chemical
24 evidence reported by others
25 consistent with the reported

Vol . 5, Pg . 956
1 statistical, pathological,
2 and biological data?
3 You asked this question .
4 And then I take you over to page 58,
where you say --
6 MR . McDERMOTT : Hang on, let me catch
7 up with you . All right .
BY MR . SHELLER :
9 Q . (Reading)
10 The known composition of
11 tobacco smoke is not
12 inconsistent with the
13 statistical finding that
14 cigarette smoke may be
15 associated with lung disease,
16 heart disease, et cetera .
17 The next paragraph, you go on and you
18 say -- and -- I'm sorry, lung cancer, heart
19 disease, et cetera .
20 You then say in the next paragraph :
21 (Reading)
23 tobacco smoke is not
0 25 pathological findings that

Vol . 5, Pg . 95 7
1 fluorescent components of
2 cigarette smoke --
3 MS . KNISELY : Biological .
4 MR . SHELLER : (Reading)
5 -- are absorbed b y
6 respiratory tract tissue, or
7 that metaplasia and
hyperplasia are produced in
9 the respiratory tract by
10 cigarette smoke, or that
11 ciliastatic -- ciliastasis is
12 produced by cigarette smoke .
13 Then you go on and you say : (Reading)
15 tobacco smoke is no t
17 biological findings, that
18 cigarette smoke is
19 carcinogenic, cocarcinogenic,
20 and ciliastatic .
21 You say, on page 59 : (Reading)
22 It is often argued that
23 the amount of benzo [a] pyrene
24 or arsenious oxide i n
cigarette smoke i s

Vol . 5, Pg . 958
r
1 insufficient to account for
2 the observed carcinogenicity
3 of cigarette smoke . This, of
4 course, is true! But no one
has yet conducted the obvious
6 experiment to determine
7 whether the amounts of the
carcinogenic polycyclic
9 hydrocarbons plus the amounts
10 of the carcinogenic
11 heterocyclic nitrogen
12 compounds plus the amount of
0 13 arsenious oxide plus the
14 amounts of the cocarcinogenic
15 phenols and fatty acids are
16 sufficient to account for the
17 observed biological results .
18 Calculation has indicated
19 that the known carcinogens
20 and cocarcinogens in tobacco
21 smoke -- in cigarette smoke
22 can account for about
23 90 percent of the observed
24 activity . Such a mixture
25 could behave synergistically,

Vol . 5, Pg . 959
1 additively, or inhibitively .
2 It is obvious that concern
3 with relative concentration
4 in cigarette smoke of one, or
5 at most, of a few of the
6 components is ridiculous . As
7 an absolute criterion of
8 safety insofar as health is
9 concerned, chemical analysis
10 of cigarette smoke, while
11 highly suggestive, is
12 physiologically meaningless .
13 You then -- I take you to page 62 . You
14 say on page 62, number 7 : (Reading)
15 None of the --
16 You say several things ; I'm just pointing
17 out to you one of them . (Reading)
18 None of the chemical
19 data acquired in our study or
20 in studies conducted
21 elsewhere is inconsistent
22 with reported biological, ~

v
~-•
23 pathological, or statistical m
~
~
24 data indicting cigarette ~
25 smoke as a health hazard .

Vol . 5, Pg . 960
1 Recommendations . Future
2 Work, 1 .
3 All additives of tobacco
4 smoke should be tested
5 biologically for their
6 adverse effect, if any, on a
7 host .
8 Was that ever done by Reynolds?
9 A . The additive thing?
10 Q . Your recommendations .
11 A . Well, the additive thing was eventually done .
12 Q . All additives were tested on a
13 biological host?
14 A . They were tested in the Ames test .
15 Q . All of them?
16 A . As far as I know .
17 Q . As far as you know .
18 A . Dr . Chin Lee was the --
19 Q. Oh . Okay . And how about your other
20 recommendations about -- that it's ridiculous if

Ln
21 you don't mix the different things together? Do N
-j
N
6
22 you recall that?
~
~
23 A . Well, that's an interesting exercise, because -j
rn
24 at one time I thought that would be really the way
25 to look at it . And in looking at some

Vol . 5, Pg . 961
1 calculations done by one of the masters in the
2 cancer field, I thought, well, if we have this
3 number of polycyclics that are tumorigenic to
4 mouse skin, and if we had this number of this
5 compound and these compounds, what kind of an
6 experiment would you have to do?
7 Well, I plotted it all out and I was a
8 little stunned to find, to do the experiment that
9 I thought would be the ultimate in solving the
10 question or showing the effect would require three
11 times the number of available mice at all the
12 laboratory supply companies in the United States,
13 because of the extent .
14 And then it goes over the cost . In
15 those days, it doesn't sound like much, but I
16 think I figured it out : It cost about
17 $12 million . And I just -- you know, nobody's
18 going to do that .
19 And, of course, some of the things I
20 suggested there -- although, I -- I have a little
21 problem . I don't know where I got that
22 90 percent . But that's all right .
23 Q . So it was never done, because it cost
24 too much ; is correct?
25 A . Well, nobody ever did it .

Vol . 5, Pg . 962
I
1 Q . Nobody ever did it .
• 2 A . And --
3 Q . Except it's done on humans .
7 BY MR . SHELLER :
8 Q . Isn't that correct, Doctor?
9 A. What?
10 Q . It's done on humans . Every human who
11 smokes is a human guinea pig .
12 A . I wouldn't say that, sir .
13 Q . No?
14 A. No .
18 Q . So you'd, rather than run the test and
19 spend the money, which was $12 million in 1964 --
20 A . Well, I never proposed that to anybody, sir .
21 Q . -- because it was too expensive .
22 MR . McDERMOTT : Object . You're
23 mischaracterizing his testimony . He said it would
24 take three times the number of animals that
25 existed in the United States, laboratory animals .

Vol . 5, Pg . 963
r
1 BY MR . SHELLER :
2 Q . Laboratory . How many animals would it
3 take, Doctor?
4 A . Well, I forget the -- in here I used 100 mice
5 per group . And it was in the hundred thousands of
6 animals . Well, you can phone some of the animal
7 supply place and say, "Well, you know, if I were
8 to need so many animals by such-and-such a date,"
9 they were nowhere close to what you need .
10 Q . How did you determine that? Did you
11 contact anybody who had knowledge to do this
12 testing, to give you an estimate on how many
' 13 animals they need and what the cost would be?
14 A . Well, as I say, the way I looked at it -- and
15 it was very simplistic ; I was just curious . That
16 if you had compound A, B, C, D, E, whatever - they
17 listed them - what was their effect singularly?
18 What were their effect in pairs? What were their
19 effect in triplets? And you can see, it just
20 snowballs .
21 Q . How about sticking to just triplets?
22 A . Well, I say, I was doing -- I mean, you're
23 asking me something I did 33 years ago and say
24 "Why didn't you do so-and-so?" I didn't do it .
25 Q . And Reynolds never did it . And to

Vol . 5, Pg . 964
r
1 your knowledge -
2 A. No . I never even turned that calculation in
3 to anybody .
4 Q . And to your knowledge, no one in the
5 tobacco industry --
6 A . Nobody in any place has ever done it .
7 Q. Right .
8 Now, Doctor -- you say Dr . Chin did
9 Ames testing?
10 A . Dr . Chin Lee .
11 Q . Chin Lee, on additives that are in
12 tobacco?
13 A . He -- he looked at all the components of
14 flavor formulations, I understand .
15 Q . Well, which ones? Do you know?
16 A . I don't know that much about all the -- the
17 flavorants by name . I know a few of them .
18 Q . You don't know whether Dr . Chin Lee
19 actually looked at all of the additives in
20 tobacco, do you?
21 A . Well, I used to see some of the things he
22 wrote that he did . And of course, in those days,
23 a lot of the flavorants and the flavor formulation
24 were coded, for obvious reasons . And there were
25 75, 100 of them, and he had run them all and found

Vol . 5, Pg . 965
r
1 no problem with all of them .
2 Q . Seventy-five or a hundred .
3 A . Something like that .
4 Q . Additives .
5 Now, how many additives are there in
6 tobacco?
7 A . Additives in tobacco?
8 Q. Uh-huh . Do you know?
9 A . Tobacco per se?
10 Q . In cigarettes .
11 A . Well, I just told you .
12 Q . You said there was only 75 or 100?
13 A. No . There may be 75 or 80, whatever the
14 number of compounds used in flavor formulation .
15 But'each blend -- brand, I should say, not blend,
16 has its own flavor formulation, and there may be
17 40 in this brand and 50 in this, and 30 in this .
18 And -- but they'll be different ones .
19 Q. I see . Well, are you able to tell the
20 jury today whether Reynolds tested all the
21 additives for Ames testing, that's mutagenicity on
22 animals in their cigarettes? ~

a
23 A . Well, as far as I know, Chin -- Dr . Lee did m
0
24 it . But then we had another experiment that ~
251 actually was a much simpler one and more

Vol . 5, Pg . 966
meaningful, I guess, if you will, in terms of
product .
Q . What was that?
A . Well, this will take a little explanation .
And we did it with five products . But let's just
concentrate on one product .
Q . When you say "a product," you mean a
cigarette brand?
A . Yeah . Like Winston or -- I'm sure you've
10 seen this someplace . It's all written up .
11 Q . Is that the one where you found --
12 when you tested one of your products, 37 and a
13 half percent of the mice got skin cancer?
14 MR . McDERMOTT : Object to the form --
16 Q . Is that one of the tests you did?
17 MR . McDERMOTT : -- of the question .
18 You're interrupting Dr . Rodgman's answer .
19 Dr . Rodgman, complete your answer .
21 Q . I'm just asking if that's one the --
22 A. No . This is -- this was a mutagenicity test,
23 Ames test, done by a contract laboratory, with
24 unimpeachable reputation . And what we did was
! 25 very simple .

Vol . 5, Pg . 967
r
1 We had the Winston cigarette, as it is
2 marketed, which has a certain amount of what we
3 call casing materials and a flavor formulation .
4 Then we had the Winston cigarette with the casing
5 materials, no flavorants . Then we had some
6 Winstons made with no casing material, and the
7 flavorant formulation the same as on the marketed
8 product . Then we had the Winston cigarette with
9 no casing, no flavorings .
10 And the Ames test showed that, when
11 you took out the flavorants of the -- the casing
12 material, the mutagenicity went up . And the
13 minute I saw the results, I -- I won't say I
14 panicked, but I was a little thunderstruck . Until
15 it hit me . We already knew why it went up,
16 because six -- it just went up a little bit .
17 Six or seven percent of this tar,
18 which is used in the -- or TPM, which is used in
19 the Ames test, is humectants, glycerol and
20 propylene glycol, and they are non-mutagenic . So
21 we -- you weren't getting those in the smoke, you
22 didn't have -- their dilution effect . So the
23 mutagenicity went up a few percent .
24 Flavorants had no effect on
25 mutagenicity .

Vol . 5, Pg . 968
1 Q . Doctor, you did this with Winston .
2 What other products?
3 A . Winston, Vantage, Now, Camel and something
4 else ; there were five brands .
5 Q . Did you do it with any of the other
6 brands?
7 A . Well, if you did it five times and you get
8 the same answer --
9 Q . But in all instances there was
10 mutagenicity, right?
11 A . Well, cigarette smoke itself is mutagenicity .
13 Did you do any other test --
14 biological testing, other than the Ames test, on
15 any of your products? The biological testing
16 A . Well, we did the biological testing on puffed
17 tobacco, we did it on one of our tobacco
18 substitutes .
19 Q . On your product line .
20 A . Well . . .
21 I was trying to think if one of our
22 products was the control for a substitute test we u+

~
-J
23 did . I-- I don't -- m
4
24 Q. You just don't know? ~
~P-
251 A . I've forgotten, apparently .

Vol . 5, Pg . 969
1 Q . There's a whole lot of biological
2 tests that one can do, right, on a product?
3 A . Right . And of course the one that is part
4 and parcel of the definition is mouse skin
5 painting .
6 Q . And that wasn't done on your products,
7 other than -- which one did you did do -- which
8 product did you do the mouse skin painting?
9 A . Well, we did it on the tobacco substitutes .
10 Q . On the substitute .
11 In a prior exhibit, it's already been
12 marked, Plaintiff's Exhibit 1056 . I'll have to
13 show you the one that I have, 'cause it's the only
14 copy I have handy .
15 You -- you had said that you didn't
16 recommend testing the mixtures of the different
17 parts of the tobacco smoke . I'd like you to look
18 at page 2 . And this is a -- April 16th, 1982,
19 from you, is it Dr . Giles, Dr . Colby and
20 Dr . Nystrom are "Misters" there?
21 A . Giles is a Mister .
22 Q. To Dr . DiMarco . And who's
23 Dr . DiMarco?
24 A . He was vice president of R & D . He had just
25 come to Reynolds about that time, early '82,

Vol . 5, Pg . 970
1 something like that .
2 Q . You say : (Reading)
3 Project Area 3 . In
4 spite of its high complexity,
5 most of the chemical
6 carcinogenesis literature
7 deals with experiments
8 involving one - or at most
9 two - 'carcinogens' (plus
10 cocarcingoens, promoters,
11 et cetera) ; the real-life
12 situation is obviously much
13 more complex than this .
14 Therefore, we propose
15 standardized animal
16 carcinogenesis tests
17 involving varying proportions
18 of first, three chemical
19 carcinogens and, later, four
20 chemical carcinogens,
21 et cetera, to,determine
22 interrelationships more
23 closely related to real-life
24 situations .
25 First, who was Dr . Giles -- or was it

Vol . 5, Pg . 971
I
1 Mister? I'm mixed up . Is that a Mister or
2 Doctor?
3 A . Yeah, he was at one time -- he was manager of
4 analytical research at one time .
5 Q . I see . Is he a doctor?
6 A . Mister .
7 Q . Mister . And who is Dr . Colby?
8 A . He was head of the science information
9 division at that time .
10 Q . At 1982?
11 A . Right . And -- and Dr . Nystrom worked under
12 him at the library and eventually became manager
13 of the science information division .
14 Q . And what was your com -- position at
15 the time?
16 A . Director of fundamental research .
17 Q . Did Reynolds ever do what you
18 recommended?
19 A . No .
20 Q . They give you a reason why not?
21 A. No . You got to re -- well, this was written
22 because Dr . DiMarco had just gotten there and we ~

-j
I-A
23 were showing him some of the things -- or ~

0.
J
24 outlining some of the things that we thought ~
251 should be done . And some he did, some he didn't .

Vol . 5, Pg . 972
1 And, of course, he eventually got us back into the
2 biological work again .
3 Q . But he didn't do this, did he?
4 A . I'm sure they didn't do this, no . They had
5 other things they wanted to do, I guess .
6 Q . Do you know if any -- anybody has ever
7 done that? In the tobacco industry or elsewhere .
8 A . I don't think it's ever been done anyplace .
9 MS . KNISELY : Do you have the copies
10 of the RDR's index -- '54 to '91? I think they're
11 out on the table .
16 Q . Doctor, while we're waiting for one
17 more exhibit, I would like you to look at what I
18 am now marking exhibit, whatever, 14? And it's
19 entitled "R & D Long-Range Planning, Smoking and
20 Health : Product and Smoke Components, Dr . Alan
21 Rodgman, October 8, 1976 ." Is that a report that
22 you prepared?
Ln
H
J
23 A . I assume so . Let me look at it . ~
6
24 MR . McDERMOTT : Do we have copies of ~
25 this?

Vol . 5, Pg . 973
1 MS . KNISELY : We don't . Sorry about
2 that .
3 MR . HOLTON : Shall we go make some
4 copies?
5 MR . SHELLER : We didn't know we were
6 going to get to it . That's the problem .
7 MR . HOLTON : Shall we go make some
8 copies?
9 THE WITNESS : I'm only going to refer
10 to one sentence . It's not going to be a big deal .
11 MR . McDERMOTT : Okay . What's the date
12 on that?
13 THE WITNESS : October the 8th, 1976 .
15 Q . Doctor, look at page 43 . Now, is this
16 a document you've prepared? Has your name on it?
17 I mean, the whole document .
18 A . I assume so . I mean, it's got my name in the
19 front and my signature . Sometimes you get
20 something like that and it may be a combination of
21 different people working on it .
22 Q . Would you look at the top of page 43 .
23 It says (Reading)
24 I .A ., Product .
25 Condemnation of nicotine as a

Vol . 5, Pg . 974
1 health hazard by some
2 smoking-health proponents
3 increased demand for
4 low-nicotine tobaccos,
5 probability of occurrence
6 70 percent .
7 And then you say "Qualitative" over in
8 the right . (Reading)
9 Lowered "tar" and
10 nicotine on established
11 brands ; if lowering of "tar"
12 and nicotine progresses too
13 far, customers weaned from
14 smoking with subsequent sales
15 decline .
16 Is that your statement?
17 A . Yes, sir .
18 Q . Why would lowering tar and nicotine on
19 established brands too far wean smoke -- wean
20 customers from smoking with subsequent sales
21 decline?
22 A . Well, it has been shown that, in many Ln

~
~
23 instances where people have come out with a very ~
m
24 low tar cig -- very low nicotine cigarette or a
25 zero nicotine cigarette, that they just don't

Vol . 5, Pg . 975
r
1 sell .
2 Q . Why did you use the word "wean" them
3 from smoking, rather than "stop" them from -- they
4 just won't buy it? What did you mean by that as
5 this -- you don't say "they won't buy the
6 cigarette," you say it will "wean" them from
7 smoking .
8 A . Well, it may be a--
9 Q . That's your word, right?
10 . Right . That's my word .
11 Q . You could have used different
12 language, couldn't you have?
13 A . Oh, certainly .
14 Q . What did you -- do you mean by "wean"?
15 A . Well, I think you know the meaning of "wean,"
16 don't you?
19 Q . Now, Doctor, I'm giving you a list of
20 RDRs, that's research reports, from 1954 to 1991
21 of Reynolds' research department reports . I'm
22 only -- because -- yeah, mark the whole thing,
23 because we'll refer to others . But I'm only, for
24 now, because I know time is short --
25 I want to refer you to page -- there's

Vol . 5, Pg . 976
r
1 no page number . Nineteen -- the year 1970 . Did
2 you make that list, Doctor?
3 A . No .
4 Q . Who made that list?
5 A . The library .
6 Q . So this is a list from the Reynolds
7 library . And they gave you a copy of it? How did
8 you have, in your possession, a copy?
9 A . Well, if you look back, about 1976, '75 --
10 let's see, where are we? 1970, '71, '72 . The
11 typewritten part . When I took over as director of
12 research, there was a folder -- Dr . Senkus had
13 been my predecessor, and before him, of course,
14 was Mr . Hoover .
15 And if you notice -- I'm sure you've
16 looked at some of the RDR's/RDM's . And at the
17 bottom of the last page there's a distribution
18 list, and usually it's to the authors, the
19 manager, the director of research, and a couple of
20 copies to the library . And if it's a report that
21 has patentability things in it, it may go to the
22 patent lawyer .
23 Well, periodically Mr . Hoover, and
24 then subsequently Dr . Senkus, they got all these
25 copies and -- and had them on file . But,

Vol . 5, Pg . 977 '
1 obviously, we've only got so much filing space,
2 and there were two copies up in the library, so
3 periodically they would tell their secretary "get
4 rid of so -- so many years of this stuff" .
5 And -- and I'm sure you've noticed in
6 several places it says -- for example, on -- you
7 flip the page, "1954, destroyed 4/9/57" . And that
8 means they took those copies from Mr . Hoover's
9 files and destroyed them .
10 Well, they kept the list of all these .
11 And when I took over from Dr . Senkus, I happened
12 to get this folder, and here's this list of -- of
13 the RDR's, and there was a similar list for RDM's .
14 And I thought, gee, this is a handy thing to have
15 to check things .
16 So, after that, I went up to the
17 library and they had a ledger book that, as new
18 RDR's were phoned in, the secretary or the
19 clerical person up there would say, "Give me the
20 title," and they would write down the date and
21 assign it a number and write it down . That's why
22 it's all handwritten .
23 And then I'm sure you'll probably come
24 across places where you may see something crossed
25 out . Well what would happen is somebody would

Vol . 5, Pg . 978
1 phone up and get an RDR number or RDM number,
2 suddenly have reservations or a problem with what
3 they were going to write, phone up and say, "Hey,
4 void that one ; I'm going to redo it," or give it a
5 new title or something . And then you'll notice,
6 sometime later on, there may be something with a
7 very similar title . You know, sometimes an
8 experiment goes wrong and you get it screwed up .
9 Q . I understand .
10 Look at the year 1970 in this list, in
11 the typewritten part .
12 A . Uh-huh .
Q . And from 1970 it says "Smoking
14 exposure studies, not in file . E .R . Fluck ."
15 There's a checkmark next to that one . Whose
16 checkmark is that?
18 MS . EASON : For the record, could you
19 please read the Bates number that appears on that
20 page .
21 MR . SHELLER : There is none .

. Ln
22 MR . McDERMOTT : Yes, there is
J
N
23 MS . EASON : Yes, there is . m

~
J
24 MR . SHELLER : Not on the page I'm ~
25 looking at .

Vol . 5, Pg . 979
I
1 MR . McDERMOTT : 501524764 . If you
2 look on the cover -- it's probably covered by your
3 hand .
4 MR . SHELLER : Oh . Okay . Sometimes
5 these help .
6 MS . BRACHTL : Repeat that .
7 MR . SHELLER : 501524764 .
8 MS . BRACHTL : Thank you .
9 BY MR . SHELLER :
10 Q . So you don't know who put that
11 checkmark there?
12 A . No .
13 Q . And what does it mean, "not in file"?
14 Is that your writing?
15 A. No . I don't know whose writing that is .
16 Q . Then you -- there's a checkmark at
17 number 4 . An attempt to establish a simple
18 procedure for determination of a drug's addicting
19 properties . And that says, "not in file," and<
20 there's a checkmark .
21 A . I have no idea what it --

Ln
N
22 Q . And then there's a checkmark -- and ~
m
23 these are the only three checkmarks on this whole ~
24 page . (Reading)
251 Number 15, "Development

Vol . 5, Pg . 980
1 of a New Screening Procedure
2 Which Detects and
3 Differentiates Major and
4 Minor Tranquilizing and
5 Sedative Hypnotic Activity ."
6 "Not in file" .
7 You don't know why, on the entire page,
8 those three have the words "not in file" written
9 next to them and checkmarks next to them?
10 A. No . I notice, over the next page, number 25
11 has a checkmark beside it but "not in file" is not
12 written on it . So I don't see any connection .
13 Q . Well that's "90-day Toxicity Study on
14 Glucose Fructose Syrups"?
15 A . Well, I think that's a good example of
16 showing the people were wrong . I said the only
17 thing the bio division was doing was smoke
18 studies .
19 Q. Right . But that's in the file, huh?
20 A . Well, 319 is not a smoke study either .
21 Q . Would you mind telling me why -- who
22 are Thompkins and Thornloe? Do you know, who are
23 the authors?
24 A . They were some -- they were some of the
25 people that were let go in the '70 incident .

Vol . 5, Pg . 981
1 Q . Are they still around, alive? Do you
2 know?
4 Q . How about -- well, Thompkins also did
5 number 15 .
6 Now, do you know why Reynolds is
7 researching an attempt to establish a simple
procedure for determination of a drug's addicting
9 properties?
10 A . I have no idea, sir .
11 Q . Do you know why smoking's exposure
12 studies from E .R . Fluck -- where's Fluck these
13 days? Do you know? E . R . Fluck?
14 A . He left -- he actually wasn't in the group
15 that left in 1970 ; he had already left . He had
16 done some work on ciliastasis, but I don't know
17 whether that's what it refers to or not .
18 Q . Where is he now?
19 A . I have no idea . I mean, you're talking 27
20 years ago, sir .
21 Q . Well I -- I just was -- so you have no
22 idea why those three studies are not in the file .
23 A . Well, I don't know what you call by "in the
24 file" and in whose file or --
25 Q . Who would know where those studies

Vol . 5, Pg . 982
r
1 are?
2 A . I think the first place to check was with
3 Reynolds' library .
4 Q. I see . And where are the -- you think
5 the originals would be in the library?
6 A . I would assume so .
7 Q . They'd still be there, right?
8 A . They should be .
9 MR . SHELLER : Could I have them
10 produced, please?
11 MR . McDERMOTT : Document production
12 has long since ended .
13 MR . SHELLER : We only found these
14 boxes six weeks ago, and we had to go -- and only
15 had them delivered a couple of weeks ago . And we
16 need to -- we can't get production of things we
17 don't know about . We didn't know this witness had
18 this material .
19 MR . MCDERMOTT : This material has
20 nothing to do with the underlying studies, which
21 have been available . Document production has
22 concluded . If you want to make a request to
23 Mr . Belasic -- I'm not the regular attorney in
24 this case . Put it in writing and give it to him,
• 25 and we'll respond .

Vol . 5, Pg . 983
MR . SHELLER : Okay .
MR . McDERMOTT : But we don't engage in
document production exercises in a third-party
witness deposition .
MR . SHELLER : All right . At this
point I'm going to let Mr . Maistros go forward,
and I will press the issue with Mr . Belasic and
see if we have to --
MR . McDERMOTT : All right . Let me
10 raise a question, and you have me at a bit of
11 disadvantage here .
12 MR . SHELLER : I know, you wanted to
13 leave at 4 :30 .
14 MR . McDERMOTT : No . That's -- that's
15 not a problem . I'm not going to raise my schedule
16 as a barrier to your going forward .
17 Ordinarily, when two attorneys
18 question, one questions and completes his
19 questioning and the other begins, and that ends
20 it, and you don't do tag-team, switching back and
21 forth .
22 MR . SHELLER : Oh . I'm finished with
23 Dr . Rodgman .
24 MR . McDERMOTT : Has that practice not
251 been observed in this case? I just want to know

Vol . 5, Pg . 984
1 what -- sequential testing . Jack is coming
2 back - -
3 MR . SHELLER : Yes . And I'm not going
4 to be questioning again .
5 MR . McDERMOTT : That doesn't precisely
6 respond to my question . Mr . Maistros, having had
7 his turn at bat, does he get another turn at bat?
8 MR . SHELLER : No . He's not going to
9 repeat anything that I've repeated .
10 MR . McDERMOTT : That is not my
11 question either . Does he get a second opportunity
12 to question under the protocol that you all been
13 following --
14 MR . SHELLER : It's not a second
15 opportunity . Don't play games now, Mr . McDermott .
16 We -- to let me question because I wanted to get a
17 few hours - and I said it to the judge's law
18 clerk - and that Mr . Maistros would then continue .
19 And I said it to the judge's law clerk . And I
20 told that to you, that I only wanted a few hours .
21 MR . McDERMOTT : Are you representing
22 to me, on the record, that has been the practice
23 in this case, that the attorney first questioning
24 is then followed by the second attorney, the
25 second lead attorney designated under the case

Vol . 5, Pg . 985
1 management order, and then the first attorney gets
2 to return and ask additional questions?
3 MR . SHELLER : It depends on the
4 situation . We've already done this before, by the
5 way .
6 MR . MAISTROS : We have done this on
7 numerous occasions . I don't know why it was
8 agreed to and I wasn't a party to it, but it's
9 happened at, I would guess, more than half the
10 depositions that I attended .
11 THE WITNESS : I thought there were
12 only supposed to be two, if I may stick in my ore .
13 Now you're the third .
14 MR . McDERMOTT : On the strength of
15 your representation that this sort of
16 switching-off has taken place before, I will
17 permit you to continue, but without prejudice to
18 the ability of my partner, who is not here and who
19 is not reachable, Mr . Belasic, to raise objection
20 to this procedure and deem the deposition closed
21 as of this point . But I will not -- I will not
22 stop things, for the moment .
23 MR . BLANCATO : I would like to go
24 ahead, while you're moving, Mr . Sheller, and put
25 something on the record about the discussion

Vol . 5, Pg . 986
1 objection that I raised this morning and that
• 2 Mr . McDermott raised this morning based on
3 pretrial order number one, joint case
4 management --
5 COURT REPORTER : I'm sorry, I can't
6 hear you . Based on what?
7 MS . BRACHTL : Rustling the paper is
8 extremely distracting .
9 MR . BLANCATO : I'm sorry . Based on
10 pretrial order number one, joint case management
11 plan entered in the Arch case, particularly
12 paragraph roman numeral VI-D-1, which said that :
• 13
14
(Reading)
Each side shall
15 designate not more than two
16 attorneys to take the lead in
17 conducting the examination of
18 the deponent .
19 It's my position and, I believe,
20 Mr . McDermott's position that Mr . J . D . Lee was
21 the first attorney to be designated to take the
22 lead in questioning this case, and that
23 Mr . Maistros was the second, and that Mr . Sheller

Ln
~
24 was therefore the third and, under the terms of ~
m
25 this order, should not have been permitted to ~
N

Vol . 5, Pg . 987
1 question the witness .
2 We've made a telephone call to the
3 judge's chambers, learned that the judge is on
4 vacation, and spoke with his law clerks, who
5 recommended that Mr . Sheller be allowed to go
6 forward . We agreed to abide that recommendation
7 and not disturb the judge on his vacation . But I
8 want to make it clear that, by agreeing to that
9 recommendation or allowing -- following that
10 recommendation by the law clerk, I don't waive any
11 objection to the procedure you followed here
12 today . And it's my position that your questioning
• 13
14
was improper under the orders governing this case .
MS . BRACHTL : This is Martis Brachtl,
15 for the record . I need to make a statement while
16 we are at this transition point .
17 We cross-noticed this deposition in
18 the New York action . It's 4 :30 . It's my
19 understanding that the Arch deposition will not
20 finish today, and we, in New York, have not been
21 able to ask any questions, and we will do so when
22 you let us know the date to resume the deposition .
23 Th an k you . , ~
-J
r
24 MS . EASON : May I also make a m
Ob
~ 25 statement for the record, that I believe that the m

w

Vol . 5, Pg . 988
1 Perry case preceded your case .
2 MS . BRACHTL : So you're saying that
3 Perry should go before --
4 COURT REPORTER : I can't hear you .
5 MS . EASON : Mr . Lee had designated the
6 Perry case for his case before your intervention .
7 I think that, even though he's not present, you
8 probably need to discuss with him if he has any
9 questions and if he would like to reconvene for
10 Perry .
11 MR . McDERMOTT : All right . Let me put
12 in my two cents worth once again .
• 13
14
As far as I'm concerned, the Arch
deposition is going to conclude today . And I will
15 leave it to negotiations with my partner,
16 Mr . Belasic, if he wishes to permit a
17 continuation . And, of course, I can't speak for
18 Dr . Rodgman or his counsel .
19 Plaintiffs in Arch have had more than
20 ample opportunity to explore any relevant issues
21 they wished, and they've spent some time doing
22 that, other time in ways that we can quibble

. Ln
23 about
J
F4
24 Be that as it may, as far as I'm m

~
• 25 concerned, this deposition in Arch will be ~

Vol . 5, Pg . 98 9
1 concluded as of the end of today, subject to
2 Mr . Belasic having a kinder review of things .
3 We've had three attorneys . The thir d
4 attorney has completed his examination, and we're
5 now going back to number two . This is highly
6 irregular and quite protracted .
MS . BRACHTL : Regardless of what
8 happens in the Arch case, whether it finishes
9 today or doesn't finish today, it's clear that
10 New York won't get to go today . So we'll talk to
11 you about another date .
12 THE'WITNESS : I want to go home . I
13 mean, I've been here for four days, listening to
14 all this stuff . Do I have a say in this ?
15 MR . McDERMOTT : Would you like to
16 confer with your counsel ?
17 MR . BLANCATO : Let's take a break .
20 (Recess taken from 4 :30 p .m . to 4 :3 9
2 1 p .m . )
22 VIDEOGRAPHER : This is tape 6 of the Ln

or.
24 going back on the record at 4 :39 p .m . CO
cn
0
25
Vol . 5, Pg . 990
I
1 EXAMINATION (Continued)
3 Q. Dr . Rodgman, how are you?
4 A . I'm tired .
5 Q . I'll try not to be duplicative of
6 either my previous questions or Mr . Sheller's
7 questions . I'm sure I'11 be reminded, if I am .
8 I'd like to mention a couple of
9 topics, first of all, and ask you if -- what your
10 knowledge is of these topics, okay?
11 A . Yes, sir .
12 Q . You ever hear of a project called
13 Project RAN, R-A-N?
14 A . Yes .
15 Q . What was Project RAN?
16 A . Reduced Ames numbers .
17 S2 • What does that mean?
18 A . Well, in the test for mutagenicity, they --
19 what is used is the test that was developed in
20 1973 by Dr . Bruce Ames, and it was used to test
21 the mutagenicity of compounds . And, for a while,
22 it was thought to be a -- an alternative to

vn
23 lung -- large-scale lung -- running biological H~
m
24 studies, but there wasn't a complete coordinatioi,p .
00
• 25 or relationship between mutagenicity and

m

Vol . 5, Pg . 991
r
1 tumorigenicity . But it's a way to get a result on
2 something very quickly ; it takes a week or less
3 than -- I never ran it ; Dr . Chin Lee did all that
4 work in-house .
5 And there was a project to develop a
6 cigarette whose smoke condensate showed reduced
7 Ames numbers . And the Ames numbers are usually
8 proportional to some of the components in the
9 tobacco smoke .
10 Q . What was that project?
11 A . Pardon?
12 Q . What was the project that you
13 mentioned? You said there was a project to
14 develop a cigarette .
15 A . R-A-N .
16 Q . No, you said there was a project to
17 develop a cigarette with reduced --
18 A . R-A-N was the project .
19 Q . That was to develop a cigarette
20 with -- with reduced --
21 A . Well, it was a -- the -- yes . It was to
22 develop a cigarette with reduced Ames numbers, and ;
23 it was called Project RAN .
24 Q . What was the name of the actual
• 25 cigarette that was developed? J

Vol . 5, Pg . 992
1 A . I don't think there was one developed . If
• 2 there was -- if anything was developed, it was
3 probably incorporated in something I know nothing
4 about .
5 Most of that work - I don't know what
6 date you have on that - was started just about the
7 time I was leaving . It may have started in '86 .
8 It was not done in fundamental R & D -- in
9 fundamental research . And I believe a fellow
10 called Dr . William Rice was in charge of it .
11 Q. Okay . Have you heard of Project XDU?
12 A . If I have, I don't -- I don't know it by
• 13
14
those initials . I mean, I don't know exactly what
it does or what it's supposed to do . I may have
15 heard of a project -- I don't know of an XDU .
16 Q. Have you heard of Project R-E-S-T?
17 A . I have a feeling I should -- I've heard the
18 name someplace recently, but I couldn't tell you
19 what it does .
20 Q. Reestablishment of solubles ; does that
21 ring a bell at all?
22 A . No, it doesn't ring a bell .
23 Q Have you heard of Project EW?
24 A. No .
• 25 Q . What was the Chemosol study?

Vol . 5, Pg . 993
r
1 A . Oh, the Chemosol study . The Chemosol study
2 was based on a patent -- issued to a man called
3 Bindig, B-I-N-D-I-G, a German . He obtained
4 patents in Germany, Canada, and the United States .
5 And sometime in the late '60s, this patent was
6 issued in the United States, and some noted
7 government officials found out about this patent .
8 And what it involved, sir, was the
addition to tobacco of citric acid, which is
10 already in tobacco, dissolved in water containing
11 some deuterium oxide and -- heavy water .
12 Well, we had looked at the patent and
13 figured well, this is not going to do anything .
14 Because the amount of citric acid -- that's a very
15 plentiful component of tobacco ; it's about two and
16 a half/three percent of tobacco is citric acid .
17 And Bindig recommended adding enough citric acid
18 to the .tobacco to, say -- and here I'm just
19 picking a figure . Say it was 3 .00 percent citric
20 acid, that when you put what he recommended, it
21 would be 3 .002 . And the amount of deuterium oxide
22 he recommended adding was like doubling the water

~
23 that comes out of your tap at home . And this J
N
m
24 Chemosol additive was supposed to reduce the
25 tumorigenicity of cigarette smoke condensate to

Vol . 5, Pg . 994
mice, and the benz -- polycyclic hydrocarbon
content of the smoke .
We -- I looked at it, from my
background, and said to management : It isn't
going to do a darn thing . Philip Morris' people
looked at it, they told their management it isn't
going to do a darn thing . American's people
looked at it, Lorillard, and so on . But these
three very powerful individuals in the government
10 said : You will do it .
11 And at a cost of three years' time and
12 several million dollars, Reynolds made the
13 cigarettes with Chemosol people standing there,
14 watching how the cigarettes were made .
15 The animal work was done, which takes
16 about two years . The chemistry was done on the
17 smoke with regard to polycyclic hydrocarbons,
18 principally benzo[alpyrene . And, here, I've
19 forgotten the exact numbers, but there was one
20 mouse difference between the control and the
21 Chemosol-treated cigarette, which is within
22 experimental error, because you could have a
23 difference of three and not make a difference .
24 The benzpyrene difference was .84
0 251 micrograms per gram of condensate versus .83,

Vol . 5, Pg . 995
1 which is an experimental error .
2 Now, this is all written up by James
3 Gargis in a reputable journal . He did all the
4 work .
5 And the, of course, the high-powered
6 officials, as soon as they learned this -- their
7 aim was, if it had worked, they would buy the
8 patent from Bindig and charge the tobacco industry
9 royalties . And of course, when it didn't work,
10 the whole thing dropped .
11 And if you're wondering who one of the
12 major proponents of it is, it was Hubert H .
13 Humphrey . The father of the man pushing Minnesota
14 all over the place, from the tobacco company .
15 And you may say : Well how does Alan
16 Rodgman know this? In 1968 or '69, when this
17 started, the monitoring of this whole experiment
18 was done by Dr . Eldon Nielson . And when he left
19 in -- Reynolds, late in 1970, I was assigned to
20 take his place on the monitoring committee, which
21 included Dr . Robert Carpenter from Philip Morris
22 and Dr . Preston Leake from American Tobacco
23 Company, and myself replacing Dr . Nielson .
24 And after Gargis published his work,
25 the Chemosol people had enough nerve to say :

i

Vol . 5, Pg . 996
r
1 Well, the cigarettes weren't made properly . And
2 they stood there and watched every step of the
3 preparation . And the Reynolds factory is just up
4 the street from here . And agreed that everything
5 was done properly .
6 Q . Let me show you what's been marked as
7 Exhibit 16 .
8 MR . MAISTROS : I don't know if there's
9 a quick way to pull that or not .
10 MR . HOLTON : This is -- this is not in
11 those boxes . This was produced by Reynolds . So
12 we need to make copies .
13 MR . MAISTROS : Well, while you're
14 doing it, then, please make this one as well . I
15 have two of this, if that's enough . You want
16 more?
17 MR . McDERMOTT : Yeah, let's make a
18 couple of copies .
19 MR . MAISTROS : Let me put a sticker on
20 it, first, Mark .
21 (Plaintiff's Exhibits Numbered 15 and

Ln
22 16 were marked for identification)
24 Q . While they're making those copies, if
! 25 you wouldn't mind browsing -- let me see if -- if

Vol . 5, Pg . 997
r
1 that's the -- that will be the next one . Maybe we
2 can save some time if you read it now :
4 The document I've marked as Exhibit
5 16, is it not?
6 A. Yes .
7 Q . It's dated January 4th, 1978?
8 A . Right .
9 Q . It's to you?
10 A . Yes .
11 Q . And it's from a D . H . Piehl?
12 A . Dr . Donald Piehl .
13 Q . Who was Dr . Piehl?
14 A . He was manager of the chemical research
15 division .
16 Q . What was your title on January 4th of
17 1978?
18 A . Director of research .
19 Q . And take a minute to look at this
20 document . Do you recall receiving this document
21 on or about January 4th of 1978?
22 A . Yes, I -- yes, I did, sir .
23 Q . And is this a document that appears to

~
24 be a complete and accurate copy of the document °~°
w
251 you received on or about January 4th of 1978?

Vol . 5, Pg . 998
1 A . I assume so . Page numbers seem to be all
2 right .
3 Q . And was this document kept by you in
4 the ordinary course of business as an employee of
5 Reynolds?
6 A . I don't know whether I kept it in my file or
7 not . I really don't know . I've forgotten if I
8 did .
Q . What do you mean by your file? You
10 mean in those six boxes over there?
11 A . Yeah -- no . I don't think it was in those
12 boxes . It may have been, but I don't think it
13 was .
14 Q . But, you do recall receiving this
15 document on or about January 4th of '78?
16 A . Yes . I mean, I wouldn't swear to the date,
17 but I remember seeing this before .
18 Q . What is the objective that Dr . Piehl
19 advises you that he had in '77/'78?
20 A . This is the taste of nicotine, the tar and
21 nicotine ratios . Those ones, you mean?
22 Q . What is the stated objective,
23 underneath "Objective"?
24 A . (Reading)
25 The ultimate goal of

Vol . 5, Pg . 999
1 this research is to provide
2 the means to maximize smoker
3 satisfaction for all Reynolds
4 cigarette brands, with
5 particular emphasis on low
6 "tar" cigarettes .
7 Q . And then the four specific objectives
8 that he lists below there . First one is :
9 (Reading)
10 Determine the taste
11 characteristics of nicotine
12 in factors that affect its
perception .
What's the second objective of head of
15 chemical research at RJR in 1978?
17 the question .
18 THE WITNESS : I didn't understand you,
19 sir .
21 Q• Well, I'm reading below the heading
22 that says m Specific '77/'78 objectives," correct?
23 A . Right .
24 Q . What's the second listed '77/'78
25 objective by Dr . Piehl, manager of chemical

Vol . 5, Pg . 1000
research at RJR?
2 A . (Reading)
3 Determine the means to
4 alter and control "tar" and
5 nicotine ratio and increase
6 nicotine transfer efficiency .
7 Q What did Dr . Piehl mean by "increase
8 nicotine transfer efficiency"?
9 A . Well -- I'd have to read this again . I
10 don't .
11 Q . It's on the second page .
13 A . I assume that's what he meant, is what he
14 wrote there . On page 2, item 2 .
15 Q . On the second page, Dr . Piehl goes
16 into some detail explaining what he means by
17 nicotine transfer efficiency?
18 A . Yes . I assume -- I assume that's what he
19 meant because that's what he wrote .
20 Q . What's the first paragraph, second
21 sentence say underneath that?
22 A . First paragraph?
23 Q . If you could just read slower for the
24 court reporter .
0 25 A . (Reading)

Vol . 5, Pg . 1001
1 It has been demonstrated
2 that blending alone can
3 greatly alter T/N ratio,
4 while, to date, other
5 techniques such as adding
6 nicotine or other additives
7 have been less expedient .
8 Q . What research was the chemistry
9 department -- or the chemical department doing in
10 '77/'78, that related to adding of nicotine?
11 A . I think they're shown on page 3 . And the . .
12 Q . Why was RJR doing research in '77/'78
13 with respect to adding nicotine to tobacco?
14 A . Well, a lot of this was experimental . I
15 don't know whether -- I'm pretty sure it was never
16 included in a product . But I guess he wanted to
17 see how it behaved under different circumstances .
18 Q . Do you know what the "Reynolds' number
19 one cigarette" is? It's referred to on the third
20 page, second paragraph .
21 A . Which paragraph, sir?
22 Q . Third page, second paragraph . Last
23 line refers to "Reynolds' number one cigarette"
24 A . No, I don't know what that is .
• 25 Q . Are you suggesting that, in 1978, the

Vol . 5, Pg . 1002
1 only addition of nicotine that Reynolds was doing
2 to its tobacco was experimental?
3 A . As far as I know .
4 This was about the same time as the
5 thing I mentioned yesterday to you, was when
6 people like Dr . Russell in England and Dr . Jarvik
7 here - maybe it was this morning I mentioned it -
were recommending leaving the nicotine alone and
9 reducing the tar, or reducing the tar and
10 increasing the nicotine . And that was discussed
11 by him at the Banbury Conference in 1979, which
12 was published in 1980 .
13 And, subsequently, there were problems
14 with consumer acceptance or test paneling of such
15 prototypes . And as far as I know, we dropped
16 them .
17 Q . And the third objective listed on the
18 first page says what?
19 A . (Reading)
20 Define the optimum
21 nicotine level in cigarette
22 smoke required to maximize
23 smoker satisfaction .
24 Determine the existence of a
25 minimum or a threshold value

Vol . 5, Pg . 1003
1 of nicotine required for
2 satisfaction .
3 Q. Was Dr . Piehl advising you of this
4 objective to get your approval or just to advise
5 you of what he was doing?
6 A . He was just telling me what -- some of the
7 things they were looking at that would run from
8 '77 into '78, possibly .
Q . And do you know if Dr . Piehl carried
10 these studies forward, that is, to determine the
11 minimum or threshold value of nicotine required
12 for satisfaction?
0 13 A . I really don't remember it . But, you know --
14 but, you know, if he did, I'm sure there's a
15 report on it .
16 Q . On the fourth page of this document,
17 do you see where he is listing the -- it's under
18 the heading "Optimum and Threshold Nicotine
19 Values" . The heading is on the previous page .
20 MR . McDERMOTT : I'm sorry, where are
21 you?
22 MR . MAISTROS : On page 3, he's got the ~

~
~
23 heading "Optimum and Threshold Nicotine Values," m
24 but it caries over to page 4 on the second
25 paragraph .

Vol . 5, Pg . 1004
2 Q . He states that : (Reading)
3 The preliminary data
4 above apparently reveal an
5 optimum nicotine value of
6 .12 milligrams per puff .
7 These results should be
8 regarded as unconfirmed at
9 this point . However, it is
10 of interest to speculate,
11 since the value for Winston
12 has usually been over
13 .15 milligrams puff and the
14 value for Marlboro
15 .13 milligrams puff or less .
16 Were you aware in 1977/'78 that Dr . Piehl
17 was doing that research?
18 A . I'm sure I was . I notice, on the preceding
19 page, they were talking about the consumer study,
20 and I was trying to think of where that was
21 conducted . It wasn't in Winston . It was
22 someplace else .
23 Q . Do you know if consumer studies were
24 done, subsequent to this period of time, to
25 determine the minimum nicotine values that were l

Vol . 5, Pg . 1005
1 acceptable to consumers?
2 A . They may have, sir . I don't remember them .
3 I think that's one of the things that
4 everything -- this is '78, of course ; a couple of
5 years went by, we were into 1980, and the whole
6 R & D thing got changed around and things were
7 dropped . Don Piehl became a director . And I
8 really don't remember some of this work, if it was
9 done .
10 Q . When you would do -- did you do,
11 yourself, consumer tests with test cigarettes?
12 A. No . I -- when I was involved experimentally,
13 most of my work was in the chemical end . I was
14 trying to think .
15 You might say it was sort of test
16 paneling, consumer testing, is when we were
17 looking at the substitutes, the Sutton smoking
18 material, as I mentioned before and the -- we had
19 a problem with some of our test panels who are --
20 people who had become very perceptive to tobacco
21 smoke . And they really couldn't tell us much on
22 tobacco substitutes, particularly when the
23 cigarette was a hundred percent . They didn't know
24 what to look for .
25 And so we had some small groups that

Vol . 5, Pg . 1006
I
1 we sort of trained, they were in-house groups, to
• 2 test substitutes .
3 That's really the only one I was
4 involved with in the Sutton smoking material .
5 We had supposedly bought a finished
6 product, but we really ended up having a year-long
7 research exercise to improve it and get the right
8 formulation for the Sutton thing . And so we had
9 to keep testing it and changing the manufacturing
10 process . And I had about six or eight people that
11 did all that . That was -- but they were all
12 in-house people, not external .
• 13
14
Q . Could you look at page 4, at the
bottom . Dr . Piehl states : (Reading)
15 It has also usually been
16 assumed that smoke pH
17 determined "free nicotine"
18 content of the smoke, and it
19 is calculated on that basis .
20 However, recent evidence
21 suggests that "free nicotine"
22 in the mouth is determined by
23 the pH of the smoker's
24 saliva .
• 25 Do you know if any work was done,

Vol . 5, Pg . 1007
1 subsequent to this date, to either verify or
2 confirm that hypotheses?
3 A . I think -- and this -- we went through this
4 with Mr . O'Fallon . That there's a report by
5 Dr . Rix on this subject -- at least it's also in
6 the report by Dr . Rix, that it was done with some
7 experiments in which human saliva was tested with
8 nicotine salts . And the saliva -- the pH of the
9 saliva is the controlling factor, not the pH in
10 the smoke or anything like that .
11 Q . In this same period of time, wasn't
12 Reynolds doing other testing to determine how to
13 increase the ability of the nicotine to transfer
14 into the human respiratory system?
15 A . If it was, I don't remember it .
16 Q . Do you know what I mean by -- do you
17 have a specific understanding of what Dr . Piehl
18 meant by "nicotine transfer efficiency," separate
19 and apart from this memo you just read?
20 A . Yes . It's -- tobacco has a, you know,
21 certain level of nicotine in it and -- for
22 example, in -- just taking a one-gram tobacco
23 cigarette, if it's got two and a half percent
24 nicotine in it, that means you've got
• 25 25 milligrams of nicotine in the tobacco . And,

Vol . 5, Pg . 1008
1 normally, maybe 1 .5 milligrams of that would end
2 up in the mainstream smoke and maybe twice that in
3 sidestream smoke, and the rest of it's destroyed .
4 And so the transfer is, say -- one and
5 a half milligrams from 25 is the transfer rate of
6 nicotine from -- to tobacco to the mainstream
7 smoke .
8 Now, one of the things that could
9 possibly be involved in some of these things that
10 we were doing that, when you puff tobacco, the
11 nicotine level goes down in the puffed tobacco ;
12 which, at some -- at one point, was 15/16 percent
13 of the blend . So, actually, your total nicotine
14 in the tobacco blend is down .
15 Then, when you increase the level of
16 reconstituted tobacco sheet, the total nicotine in
17 the overall blend goes down . And to -- if you had
18 been making a cigarette, for example, that
19 delivered 1 .3 or 1 .5, whatever number you were
20 looking for, and you ended up having, say -- in
21 one case had 25 milligrams of nicotine in the
22 tobacco, and the other you had 20, well, if you Ln~
~
23 increased the transfer rate, you could keep m
~
OD
24 n i cot i ne i n th e smo k e at the same level . ~
251 Q . Okay . Let's start, first, the

Vol . 5, Pg . 1009
1 principle that expanded tobacco has the effect of
• 2 reducing the nicotine content of the tobacco .
3 A . It does .
4 Q . Before it's burned, correct?
5 A . Before it's burned .
6 Q . And Reynolds had to develop a means to
7 compensate for that reduction of nicotine, did
8 they not?
9 MR . MaDERMOTT : Object to the form .
11 Q . In the reconstituted tobacco .
13 the question .
14 THE WITNESSs Are you suggesting they
15 added nicotine to the --
17 Q . Well, I don't want to limit it to
18 adding nicotine, because no one's going to admit
19 that, I'm sure .
20 What I'm looking at is did Reynolds
21 engage in other processes whereby the nicotine F-A
1J
N
m
22 that was lost during the expansion process could
0
CO
N
23 be regained by some other process later on? Ln
24 A . Not that I know of . As I say, I think I just
25 explained it, that -- by increasing the transfer

Vol . 5, Pg . 1010
1 rate, you could make less nicotine in the tobacco
2 behave as it had before .
3 Q . That -- that's much more accurately
4 worded than I attempted .
5 You have less nicotine in the tobacco ;
6 but, because you increase the transfer rate, the
7 exact same amount of nicotine enters the human
8 system, correct?
9 A . Yeah -- pretty well . I mean, you could --
10 you could arrange it that way . I don't recall
11 that it was actually ever done that way, but .
12 Q . When the tobacco is expanded, and
13 before the tobacco is burned, there's less
14 nicotine, correct?
15 A . Right .
16 Q . After the tobacco is burned, expanded
17 tobacco, didn't Reynolds have to devise a method
18 whereby the end product in the human system
19 remained some sort of constant to the pre-expanded
20 tobacco?
21 A . Well, you've got to remember one thing, that
22 expanded tobacco was not the whole blend . You had
23 unexpanded tobacco in the blend . So you're not
24 looking at a great difference of the total --
• 25 total nicotine in the tobacco -- as I say, it

Vol . 5, Pg . 1011
might -- we've reconstituted tobacco sheet,
juggling it and so on .
(Ms . Eason leaves deposition)
MR . MAISTROS : Let me show you what
I've marked as Exhibit 17 .
(Plaintiff's Exhibit Number 17 was
marked for identification)
MR . McDERMOTT : Let me ask a question
here . I see that counsel for Lorillard in another
10 case has just left . This is marked as
11 confidential under the Arch protective order . Is
12 the -- is the practice to type up this portion of
13 the transcript separately and not circulate it to
14 counsel for other defendants, or what? I'm not
15 sure how you all have been treating confidential
16 documents .
17 MR . MAISTROS : Let me keep this short ;
18 we're running out of time . Protocol has been :
19 You decide what you want to do, run it by Belasic,
20 he calls us and we sign off on it . Whatever
21 the -- the defendant's desire has been .
22 MR . McDERMOTT : All right .
23 MR . HOLTON : Is that part of the
24 review -
251 MR . MAISTROS : I'm not sure it's part
WAGA & SPINELLI 1 (201) 992-4111

Vol . 5, Pg . 1012
1 of it ; it's just as a courtesy . I have
2 represented that I will not share a deposition, my
3 notes, the transcript, anything till that's
4 resolved .
5 MR . McDERMOTT : All right, we'll take
6 it up with Mark, so we don't waste time here .
7 He'll get back in contact with you .
9 Q . Exhibit 17, which I've showed you, is
10 dated January 30th, 1978?
11 A . Uh-huh .
12 Q . It's Bates stamped on the right
13 508880315 through 508880316, correct? And there
14 is a -- in between, a 3158 that somebody wrote on
15 in handwriting . Do you see that?
16 A . Yeah .
17 Q . Now, it appears as though, on my copy
18 at least, the way it was produced, that pages 1, 2
19 and then a page in the middle was just reversed ;
20 it should be at the end .
21 A . Yes .
22 Q . Would you agree, though, that this

Ln
H
23 appears to be a complete three-page document of a
24 report authored by Thomas Perfetti and Lawrence
25 Hayes, and --

Vol . 5, Pg . 1013
1 A. Right .
2 Q . -- copied to you?
3 A . Right .
4 Q . And do you recall receiving this
5 report on or about January 26th of 1978?
6 A . I really don't . But if my name was on there
7 I probably did .
8 Q . And again, at this point in time you
9 had supervisory responsibility over both Perfetti
10 and Hayes, correct?
11 A . Right .
12 Q . Is there any relationship between
13 Lawrence Hayes and Wallace Hayes?
14 A . No .
15 Q. What does the summary of this report,
16 which you were copied on state, on the first page?
17 A . (Reading)
18 Chemically-bonded
19 ammonia as the pectate amide
20 and nicotine as the pectate
21 salt into ammoniated
22 reconstituted sheet should
23 improve the nicotine transfer
24 and flavor of RJR tobacco
25 products .

Vol . 5, Pg . 1014
Q . Were you aware, that on or about this
date, that Perfetti and Hayes were working on
improving the nicotine transfer and flavor of RJR
tobacco products through the use of ammoniated
reconstituted tobacco?
A . I knew they were working on it . This was the
time we were -- I believe, around the time we were
working on the ammoniation of our reconstituted
tobacco sheet and -- in an attempt to see if we
10 could figure out why Marlboro was doing so good --
11 so well .
12 Q . Did you agree that -- and I'll read
• 13
14
from -- I'm reading from the document
page, underneath "Memorandum" . Fourth line :

on the first
15 (Reading)
16 It is known that ammonia
17 is used to break down the
18 pectin in tobacco .
19 Is that a generally known principle in
20 January of '78?
21 A . Well, that was the -- the basis -- somewhat
22 the basis for the Philip Morris patent, except Ln

J
H
23 they use ammonium phosphate not ammonium gas or m

A
00
24 aqueous ammonia . So it had been known for W
~
9 251 some time, you know, since 1967 .

Vol . 5, Pg . 1015
1 Was it known by you and others at RJR
2 that : (Reading)
3 It is believed that
4 pectin chemically binds the
5 ammonia and available
6 nicotine as the amide and
7 nicotinic salt -- I'm
8 sorry -- amide and pectin
9 chemically binds the ammonia
10 and available nicotine as the
11 amide and nicotinic salt,
12 respectively?
13 A . Well, that was a theory . I don't know
14 whether you know what a CIM is .
15 Q . What's a CIM?
16 A . It's a conception of invention memorandum .
17 And what it is, is a -- an idea that Lawrence
18 Hayes and Tom Perfetti had to -- as sort of an
19 outline of a possible invention .
20 And if you notice, there's a lot of
21 °mays," and "it is believed" and so on in this .
22 What they're saying is : Is this possible and
23 should we look at it?
24 Q . Why was Reynolds interested, in '78,
25 in creating an invention or a patent related to

Vol . 5, Pg . 1016
1 enhancing nicotine transfer?
2 A . Well, it may -- it may have been -- these are
3 individual concepts, sir, that, whether Reynolds
4 was interested in this or not, had no bearing on
5 the fact that Thomas Perfetti and Lawrence Hayes
6 made this proposal . Whether we were seeking a
7 method of this or not, I don't know .
8 But there were a lot of times -- if
9 you look at the conception of invention
10 memorandum, there were a lot of things that were
11 proposed over the years, and some of them Reynolds
12 had never expected (sic) an interest in . I think,
13 if you look through the list -- in fact, somebody,
14 one time, suggested : Hey, we should have colored
15 cigarettes, orange and pink and so on, to match
16 the ladies wardrobe . Well, Reynolds never
17 expressed an interest in that . Somebody just
18 thought it might be a good idea and proposed it .
19 Q . And was the underlying premise of such
20 an invention, or a potential invention, that,
21 because of the process used to make reconstituted
22 tobacco, you lost some of the nicotine?
25 THE WITNESS : Well -- say that again,

Vol . 5, Pg . 1017
1 sir . I'm sorry .
3 Q . I'm trying to figure out why -- what
4 was the premise behind the desire to figure out a
5 method to increase nicotine transfer . Would --
6 A . Well, as I say -- as far as I know, any time
7 you ammoniate the tobacco, whether it be sheet
8 or -- or tobacco itself, like burley or
9 flue-cured, you lose ammonia -- lose nicotine .
10 And I say again that, if you do that, you get an
11 acceptable reconstituted tobacco sheet that's
12 ammoniated . If you -- that has lost nicotine
• 13
14
if -- there's a possibility the ammonia will help
in increasing the transfer of nicotine and
15 maintain it at what it had been before you lost
16 the nicotine .
17 Q . Earlier, I got into this in some
18 detail with you . . But you explained that one of
19 the purposes of expanding tobacco was to reduce
20 the end compounds that were produced during the
21 smoking process, correct?
22 A . Yes .
23 Q . At least in so far as nicotine was
24 concerned, although the nicotine content of the
• 25 tobacco itself may have been reduced as a result

Vol . 5, Pg . 1018
1 of the expansion process, wasn't it the goal of
2 Reynolds to make certain that the nicotine that
3 ended up in the human system was not reduced?
6 THE WITNESS : Well, I guess all I can
7 go -- say about that is, if -- when you go back to
8 when we introduced expanded tobacco - it was in
9 '68/'69, sometime around there, the cigarette was
10 made - it was the Winston - with about ten or --
11 eight to ten percent expanded tobacco . And
12 nothing was ever done at that point to either
13 increase the transfer of nicotine or to add
14 nicotine . They just sold the product and people
15 bought it .
17 Q . And is it your testimony -- if you
18 know, was anything similar done, such as the
19 ammoniation process, to increase the transfer of
20 nicotine from '68 to the present?
21 A . Well, as I -- as I said, ammoniation usually
22 reduces the nicotine, and it also increases the
23 transfer . So if you've lost nicotine and
24 increased the transfer, you may have offset some
25 of the effect of the loss . 1

Vol . 5, Pg . 1019
1 Here again, I have no idea that -- you
2 know, if you lost a small percentage -- dropped
3 the nicotine in the tobacco from two and a half to
4 two percent, whether the ammonia would drive
5 enough nicotine over to make up for what it -- was
6 lost . There's a possibility it could ; but there's
7 a possibility it wouldn't, either .
8 Q . Does the FTC testing method, that
9 you've discussed previously, measure the nicotine
10 content of the tobacco smoke?
11 MR . MeDERMOTT : Object to the form of
12 the question . Asked and answered .
14 Q . It does, doesn't it? In some fashion
15 it measures the nicotine content?
16 A . Right .
17 Q . Does it measure the transfer
18 capabilities of the nicotine?
19 A. No . Because they don't ever analyze the
20 tobacco . You got to analyze the tobacco in the
21 mainstream smoke if you want to figure out the
22 transfer rate .
23 MR . BLANCATO : Dr . Rodgman, it's about
24 5 :20 . You said you want to go to about 5 :15 . If
251 you'd like to go a little longer, it's up to you .

Vol . 5, Pg . 1020
1 THE WITNESS : Do you want to finish
2 this one?
3 MR . MAISTROS : Let me ask you this .
4 Your answer is what your answer is ; we'll debate
5 it with Belasic later . Are we stopping at 5 :15
6 because of the witness' desires or because counsel
7 believes we should stop?
8 MR . BLANCATO : No . Dr . Rodgman just
9 blurted out, before the last break, he's going to
10 go to 5 :15, and that's the first I heard of it .
11 It's really up to the witness .
12 THE WITNESS : I mean, I've been here
13 four days .
14 MR . MAISTROS : I understand . I'm not
15 going to debate it, because it's not going to
16 accomplish anything ; the judge isn't here . I will
17 say on the record that there are numerous
18 documents I'd like to go through with this
19 witness, have them identified, try to get a
20 stipulation that they're business records, and ask
21 him questions about . It will take longer than I'm
22 sure he's willing to sit here for the rest of the
23 day or evening to do . And I would --
24 MR . BLANCATO : How long do you think
25 it will take?

Vol . 5, Pg . 102 1
1 MR . MAISTROS : It's at least anothe r
2 day .
3 And I would request -- rather tha n
4 debate it here on the record, is we'll discuss it
5 with Belasic . The record is what it is, and
6 somebody wiser than me can decide .
7 I just want to note for the record
8 that there is previous testimony about how much
9 time he spent preparing for the deposition . I'm
10 sure you all agree he's an important witness . And
11 I think, if you take the total time of the Arch
12 examination as opposed to whoever was doing it
13 from Minnesota, including my time yesterday,
14 Steve's time today, Doctor -- or J . D . Lee's time,
15 that it's probably not as much as Minnesota's
16 time .
17 THE WITNESS : They took exactly te n
18 hours .
19 MR . MAISTROS : I'm guessing we're -
20 THE WITNESS : What are you on, tap e
21 what?
22 MR . MAISTROS : Close . Close .
23 THE WITNESS : So you're over te n
24 hours . And that doesn't count the hour and a half
25 that Mr . Lee -- i

Vol . 5, Pg . 1022
r
1 MR . MAISTROS : It accomplishes nothing
2 by us debating it . But I am not done and I would
3 object if the position is going to be taken that
4 this is the end of the deposition . You've
5 preserved all your objections as to why it should
6 be .
9 (Deposition adjourned at 5 :24 p .m .)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Vol . 5, Pg . 1023
1 JURAT
2 I, Alan Rodgman, Ph .D ., do hereby
3 certify that I have read the foregoing transcript
4 of my testimony, taken on Tuesday, August 5, 1997,
5 and have signed it subject to the following
6 changes :
7 PAGE LINE CORRECTION
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 DATE :
22 Sworn and subscribed to before me on this
23 day of -----------------•
24 NOTARY PUBLIC ------------------------------

25

Vol . 5, Pg . 1024
1 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

COUNTY OF YADKIN
2
3 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
4 I, Linda N . Russell, a Notary Public in and
5 for the State of North Carolina, do hereby certify
6 that there came before me on Tuesday, August 5,
7 1997, the person hereinbefore named, who was by me
8 duly sworn to testify to the truth and nothing but
9 the truth of his knowledge concerning the matters in
10 controversy in this cause ; that the witness was
11 thereupon examined under oath, the examination
12 reduced to typewriting under my direction, and the
13 deposition is a true record of the testimony given
14 by the witness .
15 I further certify that I am neither
16 attorney or counsel for, nor related to or employed
17 by, any attorney or counsel employed by the parties
18 hereto or financially interested in the action .
19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereto set my
20 hand and affixed my official notarial seal, this the
21 12th day of August 1997 .
22 ~~.~y. e1e6 T
WIti.13C 5;?:I
23 N oth ~ r.rdina . Yadkin Cou

ELI . ----------T -----I ------- --
LIN Notsry Pubsc Linda N . Russell, Notary Public
My Commfssbn Expl__ rex_ Q•~?
24 My Commission Expires 8/25/97
25

EXHIBITS
4
Arch, et al . vs . The American Tobacco Co ., et al.
Civil Action No. 96-5903-CN
4
As Attachment to Deposition of.•
ALAN RODGMAN, PH . D . Tuesday, August 5, 1997

(VOL . 5)
0 I I CONFIDENTIAL
Exhibit Nos . 1 - 17
PREPARED FOR :
MARTINL. HOLTON, III, ESQUIRE
PREPARED BY:
WAGA & SPINELLI.
FOUR BECKER FARM ROAD
ROSELAND, NEW .IERSEY 07068
Phone : (201) 992-4111
njn° CONf1DE1-11 1 AL
Subject: 5.okin9-itealth Research ProOrIR ' Dete : April 16 . 1982
Alem RodpKan
J . A . Gtl es
Tos Or . G . R, Dlrkrco F . 9 . Colby
C . it . Mystro+e
t
in response to your request, this .eoorandua outlines opportunities
for a substantial research proOrem related to the tookin and health
controversy . In the ekta, these are tn eddition to outs~de tndnstrr-
sporsored research (see Appendix A) end do not necessarily coestder
past 1lrftations .
Concerning the outside Industry- and RJR•sponsored reseerch the
following reco .meadattoas are ottered :
o, RJJtT ALO oersonael be more Intimately inrolved In decisions
VAapt, discussions end monitoring ef thtpr oQress of this
~Y!lbardh . tn the post, these activities Aave been ltatted
~ to R 1e9e1 personnel sad/or upper w ne9e .ent with 1t«tted
''••tlu~to devote to tbe saokinp•Meelth controversy .
Rf0 aersoanel be involved in the conteaplated euJor RJR
to fund iundiaental research on diseases alleged to be
ted to saokinq without, however, necesserily involvinQ
tn' as such .
Rt0 personnet be sore involved in the existing RJRi-
rted pro0rAe on basic research adetnistration by Kessrs .
eier and tecon .
,_.._ _ . elopAent ot detailed reco~anendettons= t .e ., prol ect proposels/
wlthiri+iRMeElrort ttee tri .e is essentially impossibte because of the
bresdt/iq;,p*doinp bfoe~edtcel research which t•pects on the se~oktn9 and
hea)th~l[troYersy . The attached tables of contents froa the lest coepre-
hensiYfT~ir eon lienerai's Report (1979) illustrate this breadth .
of aress have beea identified which constitute gaps or
weekain the present state of knowled e . Eecb Is addressed below i
with a<~;d~ stete~Kat ot background and t~e, pyerill thrust of research t
~eor~t~. It~1s clear that soeu of this research could be eonducted tn-house,
ire facilities not presently on h :nd . Other areas will be
best addressed by tuadia9 competent outside researchers aad, providing I
RJA tohnicel support as appropriate .
V
V
•
nPN /OnV eM-AMe,1pe

.. ..
r4AuwY/rra•~~C~~XH181T~
pwv[ ....~..~/A ]>
WiLLIAM C . L .AB0ROt
RCgIilTtRC• rRor• RCPORTtII
s
•2•
PROJECT AREA I1 :
The literature contains ewvr studies on animal (rouse skin, tnstil•
lation, Inhalation, etc .) tests of Individual s+noke components and/or
smoke lroctions, shacing positive or negative results with reference to
the so•called Initiation and/or pro.otion of earclnogenesls . 1fe propose
to test all knorm s .oke eoweonents (present above a certain Qusntitative
level~ for entl•earttao?enle ectivlty In one or sort general eerclno-
genes s testing systems s
a) Initiation phase
b) prowtion phase, etc .
tw" PROJECT ABE/l Itt

lbst of the titerature on chemical carctnogenests isqltcttly or
.(
,w n-;rr
explictt suaes that results of experiments with a high level ef a
::Zc A cheRlc~~r dsinp relatively few antalt, can be extrapolated to a
~~ reei•1 e situttion . There is also to date unresolved controversy
r+bethe eAeral toxteolo4tul prtnctple that there is a threshold
'" level substance's biological action, does or does not apply to
carcinogenes s . therefore we propose standardized enial circtnoeeacsis
~ tests, tftereAt species, iRvolving different strength proups of
~ _ ehee~k tno9enf wet~ es 'strong' earelnogen~ s, "aediua• arciaoQens,
•n0 ret eas tetttnp e~xle~u . tolereted dou9es involving a
.oS anisa1=,1/(e levels of ax~ chemical entittes
~i volvp~
n a=r ~~ue+bol=r
tSoee of tbe:e axpertants e~
,~a. pi~rrea underwn~r tl~rou~h see,e Oovern .ent tunded researct:.) Ye
maan~ ther st to exaanQ these projects to test the validity of the
~ aifo th• hypothesis of chemical earcinolenesis .
"" PRQJECT' /1 :
tn'ttde of its bi9h complexity, =st of the c,heoical carclno-•
9eneststtt+erature deals with experiments involving one • or at srost
~ two •`n=" (p1us co•carcinotens . prOpotSrf, ete .)s the real-
~ life songls ObvloNsly «ucb ebre complex then this . Therefere
We pro~andardited eniewl earclnopeneslt tests Involving
=w+vP varying proportiont of first, three chemical carcinogens and leter,
four cIM~MRI earcinoQens etci, to deteraine lnterretationships more
closely related to reat•1{fe stwttons .
PROJECY AREA 84 :
ozb r ' One of the chief antagonists of smoking, tn the past, has published
*-Awau rouse skin tests, elaiMing to show that 'tar' frorn c!~arettes to whi~,h
nitrate has been added, proved_less carcinog+nic_tn these tests . Hore
recently_, that seae tea~e has elUiaed thet high nitrate tobaccos yield ©
ille9ed toainer+tise ea Cinogenieity . ~lherittore .wa roposetto teste A
•3-
high nitrate versus low nitrate tobiccos 1n a suitable, to be developed .

aniwl imalation sodel which wt11 assay simultaneously the so•called
'putfculate aed gas phasa' of cigarette uroke .
Mt4JECT AMA IS :
,, .
relitlirely 1loitea nuaber of studiei~bii sbownthit ir~antait
experiaents the results are very contradictory and roy not depend on the
chemical and/or other factors which an experiAentsr wiy ennt to tett*
but on the design protocol of the study, and, most specifically, oa the
rethode by whlch the anixul : are 'hendled" . Thsrefore we propose to
deterrine effects of vurinp handling procedures such as caging, feedin9,
foAdiinp, itrefs, etC ., on the outco .oe of animal models ettperiaeats
related to diseases alleged to be associated with s .okin4 .
Mo,1ECT AM fi : .
TMire'~are some li .ited epfdeafelo0tCa1 data iR the litsrature
Mhich ~{odi te that prepupt women have a~eReral cencer Incidence
way be oir~ xpected' levels . Therefore we suggest to determine
plVrsf 1 parametert of prepnency which euy have a eancer preventing
sffectiF: ,,~
l~~
pROJEC~ /7 !
'weak lunp' hypothesis . It has been postulated that
ia of lcmp eancer, other respiratory system eaaesrs,
hrente breeehiti : . atc. . are essentfallr oeoale who in
__ s Mould lwve betA affected by pulaoniry tbbeiYUlosfs,
ci--- lwre an fa-bor+a 'weak tunp• . Therefore we propose to
Iete tber or aot en :yrwatie or other piraaoters can be tdeatftied
W ch terNfne that an individuel has a'penetiully' determined
sus ty to lung diseases in 9eneral,
PROJEcu.0A is: .
A'ili"*ity of scientists working on non•wwliQnent chronic
respi .• diseases believe 1n a hypothesis that~~ eo is due
to a 1atbalance in poi .onery eniy.es in that smoking, through an
oxidative effect, either proaotes depradatfon of the protein laycr of
elastic 1ong tissue framework, end/or inhibits lung constituents,
which prevent such destruction . Therefora we suggest to Investigate
which saokscoa1 onent or coeponents or fraction •if any'eould
exert the so-ulled 'oxidetiw' effect postulated by the 'elastese' a
egplt4se.x1~pothtsis . This project could possibly be done in•tiovse, 0
If proper aefwl facilities were available . x
.
i
. . . . ,~
~ ~-- ---------_ _-____--_ ._._.- -- - - -- -- -- ---- - - 1W
~
PRAJECT AREA IQ :
C1aiMs that carbon monoxide an0 ntcotine eey be responsibte for the
association between saohinp and urdiovesculer disase ere ottee made .
These clai .o are given support by oxperiments conducted with either
carbon sonoxide or nieotine separately .
ihere is some evidence In the literature wl :ich suggests that nicotine
ewy actually counteract soNe of the physiological effects of carbon
etonoxide . It is suggested that tM synergtsm andJor anteWisNS between
carbon monoxide sad nicotine be tested In snieel eadels using a battery
of epecitic cardtovaculer parameters .
-: nv Pao,>ECT AREA tla:

Certain Individuals may be oore suscepttibte to s .okinp sssociated
resptr and other diseases . The suscepttblllty may be reflected in
the 0gtui~ties of these individuals . It /s, theretore .
prsPo d~, et the tesMinoZO01N1 protilet of se~okers and aon-sMOktrs
harir~ihete dtstases be tmrestlpated and Eo.pered to Mealtl~y non•saokcrs .
as wel~aeet healthy sNOker : . .
rRDJl~~b /11s
v. ••r " MW*sous one million + men Anericen tancer Socie~r (Ita :onond) stqQy
Is 61 ted as the a~or evidence of the association bet+teen lun4
~cancse~oicfn9 . Noa+ever, the study has beeR criticized and is knarn
"'°to ~ butlt•iA b/eses, inconststeectes In the data, support for
~the ttonel 1{tpotbes/s, ttc . (You will recall that the consti-
~+sau tutt 1 tMstsproposes that the hiOher 1evels of the diseases
Itr,v,t ess with saokip ts due to the fact ttat sookers are different
« . kir:ds ple than non•s+rokers, i .e ., they ara eare vnlnerable i
eons 1 types .) It 1s proposed this an en•de th study of the :+
. : raw to carried out In ordcr to expose these veeCne :ses etc .,
and r+llablt study of similar or larger scope be desi9ned to
;. test,,1D~'~constitutlonel hypothesis . (Potential cost ) S2 tailiton/year t
, ; for ~ ysers . ) i
i
~
E+
Much evidence exists india tin9 thatQe nettc susceptibility fs an
leportant factor In chronle diseases assoeieted with sMokiaq . It Is, t
i therefore, proposeA that as epide+aioloQtcal study be conducttd of the ~
; causes ot deat * in tirst and seeond back 9eneration biood repitives of '
smkers and non•sokers having sote allepedly ukoking associated dtsease, o ~
such as lwy cancer, other respiratory cancert, chronic bronchttis, ~
emphysea, etc .
v
~
V
}
.;.
PROJECT AREA 813 :

Evtdence iw= been presented sup4est1n9 that sihokin9 my affect the
R+etaboilsa of cheRicals In mn . These effects eoy be desirable or
undesirable and tuy be quite different In certain indtviduils . tt ts,
therefore, proposed that the e~etabolisw or a coor+Otnated, ltatted number D
of cher1ci11y different non-toxtc substances be determined in groups of
smokers, as well as In groups of non•taokers .
PROJECT AREA 114 :

A major thrust against the tobacco industr hit been claims of
alleged effects of slde :trem s.oke . These iac~ude both Naltw claims,
~ as will as those due to ennoyance or ct~~rette s .oke in the at .osphere .
This problem could be alleviated by techniques which would remove the
anaoyence etrects of cigarette s+.oke . it is proposed that we spopsor
.,~ . electrtcal/eaecAsntcal research oo tnexpensive, energy efficient and
uaobtrmtve equipeent for removing cigarette s .oke and cigarette saoke'
odors fpfthe Indoor indestrtal, public, and home environments .
M
'* ~ t!~t r unS e ocyi ot r
• Knp,
e ttr Rpent
at ! np,1 anc r- ont
d lttt d t on
i Ap
Engtne~nc . IASIIRAE) us recently released aew standards for
rentti requ raeents for smoking and non•smoktng, areas tn Industrial
butldt The raqutreN eat : tA arees whert snottap ts pemtttea 9reatly
qacree apital investment and subsetuent operattn9 costs tor the
~ :ainildt ~ltneertn9 and other studies should be undertaken to test
~adt,e ve ty ot these requirewrentt end new e~etAodt of dea11w9 with these
'8 ~eQui t Moula be reseerched .
..AIxsul4
k•
Attaclaents
APVERDIx A
WR7tEKT MUNC-NEA1T11 RESEARCN VENICLES
Two tyDes of projects are twwed by the Council for Tobacco Research .
There ere also Plens vnder consideratlon by R,MT to cowatt svbstantial
fuRds to fundaoe, :tal research ion diseases alleged to be associated with
s.*kinR .
The e+ost t .portent effort by the Meriun Industry ts eide through

the Council for Tobacco Research-USA 1n New York . This orRaRi :ation
handles generally t•ro types of projects :
a) Cener.l projects eDO+''ored by an independent peer
~~i9rouD of scientists, the •Scientific Advisory
b) Specill projects ~enerally inltiatel, discussed and

. approved p~r tndvitry counsel and/or outside litigating
,.•, . w,a,, attorneys lror firfss such as dacob, /~elinper i iinne'ant
frSbok . 14sr4y i RacoA .
Ati:.. . .
Es
Ses ::J. .
!L ."••i •t!:
r
.215 546_0942 .,,_• 5HELLER, L& B au . 1~~a P. 2
7j~i*/97 MON 17 :52 FAX
.
ALAN RODGMAN, Ph .D
~• Dr. Rodgman was, formerly employed In the Research and Development Department
at R.J. Rqnolds Tobacco Company ("Reynolds") . He is a fact witness who may also offer
expert testimony . Dr. Itodgrnan has a A .A . in chemistry and qs, M .A, and Ph.D in organic
~ chemistry from the Unlversity, of Toronto . He vka$ employed„iii scarlous capacities at .
' Reynolds from 1954 undl •1987. - .
Dr. Rodgman is expected to testlfy or opine concerning the development over time
of scientific knowledge relacing to smoking and healrh. Dr. Rodgrnan is ('Itrther expected mw
testify cottcernitig historical activities of the Research and Development bepatbrae~nt at
Reynolds, includfng research conductad by or for Reynolds, in the areas of smoking sad
health, including the subject of the constituents of cigarette staoka,
Dr. Rodgman fs further expected to testify concerning the design, aoasttvstion atyd
manufacture of cigarems, incluoiag tbe state-of-the-art in c,igarette design, and goveromattal
regutatioA/pazticipation with respect thereto . Dr. Rodgtnan ts expected to tes} ify dtat, In the
design of cigarettes . Reynolds speciticaUy. and rhe manufacturers of cigarettes generally,
have responded both to the scientific criticisms of cigarettes and .the demands of smokers.
Indeed, the tobacco irbdustry, ineludina Reynolds, were leaders in inventing or developing
such cigarette designs .
Finally, Dr. Rodgman may be asked to comment upon the opinions expressed by
other witncsses, as well as the evidence upon which they rely, to the extent that such
opinions and evidence related to his areas of expertise . -
Dr . Rodgman will base his testirnony on his education . training and experience, his
review of scientific information and literature concerning the subject matter described above
that are reasonably relied upon by members of his profession, his review of documents from
Reynolds concerning the subject matter described above made in connection with the expert
opinions he itatends to offer in this case during the tenure of his em131oyinent at Reynolds
and, as appropriate, documents either produced by other defendants in this fawsuit
concerning cigarette design or relied upon by plaintiffs experts oA these subjects, and his
review of testimony atld . evidence in this case . ~
FTC SMOKING METHOD
USED FOR
" TAR" AND NICOTM
DATA
Alan Rodgman, MA, Ph.D .

2828 Birchwood Drive
Wiaston-Salem, NC 27103 3410
30 August , 1994 Ln
~
~
~
m
~
HEALTH ASPECTS OF POORLY DEFINED "TARS"
OBTAINED FROM TOBACCO BY A VARIETY
OF METHODS 35
APPENDIX B : INFORMATION PROVIDED RJRT MANAGEMENT

IN THE MID-1960s FOR COMMUNICATION TO
THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION re ITS
CIGARETTE MS "TAR" AND NICOTINE
LABELING PROPOSAL 7
APPENDIX C: DETERMINATION OF "TAR" YIELD FROM

ULTRALOW-"TAR" CIGARETTES :
SPECTROPHOTOMETRY 44
REFERENCES 46
m
FTC SMOKING METHOD USED FOR "TAR" AND NICOTINE DATA
SUMMARY
In the mid-1960s, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced its intention to have cigarette packs
labeled with the "tar" and nicotine yields from the packaged cigarettes because of the reports issued between 1950
and 1964 on the following :
• The dose-response relationship reported in retrospective and prospective studies on the association
between smoking and lung cancer
• The production of epidermal carcinoma in laboratory animals skin-painted with cigarette smoke
condensate (CSC)
• Reports that nearly all the tumorigenicity of tobacco smoke resides in the CSC
• The demonstration of a dose-response relationship between the amount of CSC applied to the animals'
skin and the number of tumor-bearing animals (TBA)
• The demonstration of the presence in CSC of extremely small quantities of several polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) and aza-arenes reported to be tumorigenic to the skin of laboratory animals
• The publication in 1964 of the Advisory Committee's Report to the Surgeon General Report in which,
on the basis of the evidence noted above, cigarette smoke - particularly its particulate phase - was
classified as a health hazard of sufficient importance to warrant appropriate remedial action
To rank cigarettes marketed in the U.S . according to their MS "tar" and nicotine yields so the consumer
could select, from the labeling data, the cigarette that spoke to his/her individual smoking-health concerns, the FTC
proposed the development of a precisely defined protocol which would permit the reproducible determination of
yields of cigarette mainstream smoke total particulate matter (MS TPM), MS TPM nicotine, and MS TPM water,
and "tar," the latter entity to be calculated from the equation
MS TPM - MS "tar" + nicotine + water .
Both the FTC and the cigarette manufacturers recognized from the very beginning that the FTC's publication of
cigarette "tar" and nicotine yields was to serve solely as a ranking of the cigarettes . ?he values determined had
nothing to do with ranking the smokers and were never intended to do so.
The details of the analytical procedure specified by the FTC in its protocol and how some of them differ from
human smoking parameters are shown below :
• ®
FTC SMOKIlKG PARAMETERS vs HUMAN SMOKIIVG PARAMETERS
Param¢ler or Condition FTC Soecification Smoker
• conditioning ojthe cigarette prior to smoking and analysis
• time of conditioning, hr • 24 • variable ; depends on individual

smoker
• temperature of conditioning area, °C • 23 .9 (75•F) • variable ; depends on environment
encountered by Individual smoker
• relative humidity (RH) of 0 • variable; depends on environment
conditioning area, % encountered by individual smoker
• nature oJthe smoking machine • 20-port • NA
• major smoking parameters=
• puff volume, nd • variable ; dependent on individual

smoker
• puff duration, aec • variable; dependent on individual
amoker
• puff frequency, no ./min • variable ; dependent on individual
smoker
• other smoking parameters
• depth of Insertion of cigarette in • 11 • variable ; dependent on individual

holder, mm smoker
• temperature of smoking laboratory, • variable ; dependent on
eL. environment encountered by
Individual smoker
• RH of smoking laboratory, % • variable ; dependent on
environment encountered by
individual smoker
• number of cigarettes to be smoked • NA
• butt length of a non8ltered cigarette • 23 • variable ; dependent on individual
to be smoked, mm smoker
• butt length of a filtered cigarette to • overwrap length + 3 • variable ; dependent on individual
be smoked, nun smoker
• method of trapping q f TPAf • Cambridge filter pad • oral cavity and respiratory tract
• analytical procedurea jor determination oJTPM, TPM nicotine, and TPM water jor calculation of cigarette "tar" yield
• TPM, mg/cigt • gravimetric • NA

• nicotine in TPM, tttg/cigt • originally the Griffith still • NA
procedure ; later a OC
procedure
• water in TPM, mg/cigt • originally, Karl Fischer • NA
titration; later a CiC
procedure
• 7PM behavior
• TPM retained by trap, % • 100 • 50-90

• TPM emitted from tap, % • 0 • 10-s0
' Theae are essentially the values described In a publication issued almost 30 years before (Bradford et al ., 1936) and used in
USDA studies in the early 1960s (Ogg et al ., 1962 ; Ogg, 1964).
•
iv
The FTC was adamant about the details of its smoking procedure . Its analytical protocol was written almost
on "tablets of stone" despite the fact that personnel from the individual cigarette manufacturers informed FTC
personnel that the consumer may be more misled than informed by the "tar" listing for a variety of scientifically
valid reasons . Each of the reasons was communicated to the FTC by representatives of one or more members of
the Industry . Information communicated from the Industry to the FTC included the following :
• The smoking parameters defined in the FTC protocol are not those of either an average smoker or of most
individual smokers (see preceding Table) .
• The FTC "tar" yield determined for, a specific cigarette brand is not the "tar" yield to which the
individual smoker is exposed because each individual consumer does not :
condition his cigarettes prior to smoking as is specified in the FTC protocol for cigarettes to be
analyzed ; the moisture content of the consumer's cigarettes is dependent on moisture content at time
of manufacture, transportation conditions, shelf time, time between opening of the pack and
consumption of the last cigarette ; ambient conditions while smoking the cigarettes successively,
smoke a cigarette in a regimented fashion ; thus, the number of puffs, the pressure drop across the
cigarette, its burning temperature will vary from smoker to smoker and with individual smokers from
cigarette to cigarette,
smoke each cigarette under conditions identical with those in the FTC procedure,
retain the total intake of MS TPM as does the smoking machine .
• The "tars" from two different cigarette brands that yield the same amounts of "tar" are not
compositionally the same .
• Specific "tar" components from a cigarette brand that yields say 30 mg of "tar" are not present at twice
their level in the "tar" from a brand that yields 15 mg of "tar". The cigarette design technologies used
to control "tar" yield also markedly influence the MS composition, including that of the "tar ."
Since the implementation of the FTC procedure in 1967, cigarette have changed markedly because of the
introduction of new design technologies . Also, consumers' smoking regimen has changed since the mid-1960s and
is substantially different from the 35-m1 volume, one 2-sec puff per minute specified by the FTC .
The FTC protocol is no longer appropriate for analysis of many current cigarettes, particularly those with
low- and ultralow "tar" yields . Despite the fact that these inadequacies in he FTC procedure were pointed out by
the Surgeon General in his 1979, 1981, and 1982 reports, the FTC has made no effort to modify the major smoking
parameters (puff volume, duration, frequency) prescribed in its procedure for "tar" and nicotine determination to
counteract these criticisms . However, the FTC has made several other changes in the FTC procedure : It has
incorporated carbon monoxide (CO) determination into its procedure and CO values are now reported in the FTC
reports on "tar" and nicotine yields of cigarettes marketed in the U .S . The FTC also approved the use of automated
gas chromatographic procedures for the determination of the nicotine and water in the MS TPM . These latter
modifications were demonstrated to be significant improvements (less time consuming, less expensive, more
accurate) over those originally dictated in the FTC protocol . These improved analytical procedures were proposed
by Industry R&D personnel, not by FTC personnel .
Detailed studies involving 1979 85-mm Winstons and Marlboros, 1984 100-mm Winstons, and 1984 120-
mm Dawn cigarettes of the effect on MS "tar" and nicotine yields of changing the three major smoking parameters
revealed the following :
• Variation in puff duration has little effect on the "tar" and nicotine yields of the 85-mm Winston or
Marlboro . -
v
• Variation in puff volume or puff frequency has a significant effect on the two yields . Increasing either or
both increases the "tar" and nicotine yields .
• The "tar" and nicotine yields for the 85-mm Winston were greater than those for the 85-mm Marlboro .
• For a given increase in puff volume or frequency the "tar" and nicotine yields increase for both the 85-
mm Marlboro and the 85-mm Winston but the % difference between the Marlboro and Winston "tar" and
nicotine yields decreases .
Thus, if the FTC does modify the three major smoking parameters, particularly increasing the puff volume and puff
frequency, the "tar" and nicotine yields for marketed cigarettes will increase over the values obtained currently .
To reiterate several points mentioned previously : the following aspects of the protocol for the so-called FTC
procedure for the determination of cigarette MS nicotine and "tar" yields (and subsequently carbon monoxide yield)
should be remembered :
• The final protocol was a product of the FTC which dictated every detail of the protocol .
• Its implementation was ordered by the FTC .
• Its purpose from the very beginning was to rank marketed cigarettes according to "tar" or nicotine yield
to permit the consumer to choose a cigarette whose deliveries satisfied his/her concerns about the effect
of cigarette smoke on the smoker .
• The "tar" and nicotine yield data obtained by use of the FTC smoking and analytical procedures were
never considered by either the FTC or the cigarette manufacturers as a means to somehow rank smokers .
vi
FTC SMOKING METHOD USED FOR "TAR" AND NICOTINE DATA'
I. INTENDED USE OF SMOKING METHOD RESULTS
A. Statement of Purpose
The results from the FTC analyses of the "tar" and nicotine yields in the mainstream
smoke (MS) from cigarettes marketed in the U.S. were intended to accomplish the following :
To permit the cataloging or sequential listing of the cigarettes for their MS yields of
these two smoke entities (c, f. FTC, 1967b, 1978) generated under standard and
reproducible conditions. Subsequently, a third MS entity, CO, was added to the FTC
listing (FTC, 1981) .
• To permit the consumer who wished to continue smoking to select a cigarette whose
MS lltar" and/or nicotine yield was compatible with his/her concerns about the
effect(s) of cigarette smoking on his/her health .
It was never anticipated by the FTC or by the cigarette manufacturers that the FTC lists could .
serve as a means to catalog or rate cigarette smokers .
The following factors were known or suspected from the very beginning of discussions
among the FTC and the representatives of the cigarette manufactureres on a standard,
reproducible procedure for the determination of cigarette MS "tar" and nicotine yields :
• Individual smokers do not smoke a cigarette under the precise smoking regime
dictated in the FTC procedure .
• Unlike the smoking machine used in the FTC procedure, individual smokers may
miss one or more puffs during the smoking of a cigarette because of involvement with
other activities (writing, telephoning, discussing, etc .).
• Unlike the smoking machine used in the FTC procedure, the individual smoker does
not smoke his/her cigarette to the butt length dictated in the FTC procedure for
untipped and filter-tipped cigarettes .
• Unlike the smoking machine used in the FTC procedure, the individual smoker
exhales a portion of the MS .
• It is highly probable that the per milligram compositions= of the MS "tars" from two
~'I1ro original FTC procedure for smoking cigarettes to determine "tar," nicotine, and water deliveries in mainatream .moke (MS) (values
first reported in 1967 ?PTC, 1967), was subsequently modified for the simultaneous determination of MS carbon monoxide (cf . FTC, 1981)
2 In addition to the differences between the compositions of the particulate phases, the compoaidons of the vapor phases will differ .
1
different brands of cigarettes whose "tar" yields are 20 mg are entirely different .
• It is highly probable that the per milligram compositions' of the MS "tars" from two
different brands of cigarettes whose "tar" yields are 20 and 2 mg, respectively, are
entirely different .
B. Other Analyses Similar to FTC Smoke Analysis
In the U.S. there are numerous analyses of consumer products similar to the FTC
analysis for "tar" and nicotine in cigarette mainstream smoke (MS) :
• Composition of vitamin pills in terms of weight or units of Vitamin A, vitamin C,

thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin D, vitamin B,,, etc .
Even though the analysis for the levels per pill of various vitamins appears on
the label, the consumers absorption of the each vitamin will depend on the
individual consumer's metabolism . The label listing only indicates how much of
each vitamin is ingested when the consumer swallows the pill, not how much is
actually effective in and beneficial to the consumer .
• The urban and highway mileage per gallon of gasoline expected for an automobile
model tested under certain driving regimes representing the average driving habits of
and conditions encountered by the American driver, e .g., 20 mpg under urban
conditions, 28 mpg under highway conditions . These two mileages are listed annually
for each new automobile model and are listed in numerous publications as information
to enable a potential automobile buyer select the automobile of his/her choice .
Depending on his/her driving skills, individual drivers may get more or less mpg
than the reported 20 mpg in city driving and more or less mpg than the reported
28 mpg on the highway.
• The mileage rating of automobile tires, e .g., 40,000-mile tires, 50,000-mile tires .
These ratings are determined by testing the tires under specified driving conditions
and ensuring that they are periodically and properly maintained during testing .
Here again, how many miles are obtained with a given set of tires depends on
the driving skills and habits of the owner, the terrain over which the tires are
driven, and whether or not the tires were maintained at proper inflation and
rotated according to prescribed schedule .
• The content of fat in dairy products expressed as % butterfat .
• The levels of various components in foodstuffs are determined by approved analytical

procedures and the results listed on the marketed packages, e .g., on the package of
• 3 In addition to the differences between the compositions of the particulate phases, the compositions of the vapor phases will differ .
2
a popular cereal are listed the amounts per serving of protein, fat (saturated, fat
(unsaturated), carbohydrate, cholesterol, sodium, potassium, iron, zinc, magnesium,
calcium, copper, phosphorus .
It is known that the nutritional effect of each of these components is not the
same for each consumer but depends on the individual consumer's metabolic
processes.
II. CHRONOLOGY
A. Introduction
While the concern about the particulate phase of cigarette mainstream smoke (MS)
received particular emphasis in the early 1950s, numerous investigators between the late 19th
century and the early 1950s had commented on its possible effect on the health of the smoker
(see Appendix A) .
Six major events in the 1950s and early 1960s escalated the concern about the MS
particulate phase' and triggered the FTC's proposal to have the U .S. cigarette manufacturers
report the "tar" and nicotine deliveries of individual cigarette brands :
• The epidemiological data from both retrospective and prospective cigarette smoking
studies that indicated a dose response relationship between the number of cigarettess
smoked per day and specific disease entities, particularly cancer of the lung (see
summary of the epidemiology studies in the Advisory Committee's report to the 1964
Surgeon General (USPHS, 1964)] .
• The first reported production of skin carcinoma in susceptible strains of laboratory

animals painted periodically with massive doses of mainstream smoke cigarette smoke
condensate (MS CSC) prepared under conditions more or less simulating the human
cigarette smoking regime' (Wynder et al ., 1953a, 1953b, 1955, 1956 ; Wynder and
Wright, 1957) .
• Reports that nearly all the tumorigenicity (mouse-skin painting) of tobacco smoke
4 Even though they differ in composition, MS total particulate matter (rpM), cigarette smoke condensate (CSC), and "tar" (water- and
nicotinafree TPM as detined by in the FTC procedure) became almost equivalent when referred to In d'ucuuiona of the effects of cigarette
MS particulate phase on the health of the conaumer .
s Fewer than two dozen cigarette brands were marketed In the U .S . in the 1950s and their per cigarette deliveries of "tar" and nicotine were
remarkably uniform, ranging from 33 to 40 mg "tar" and 2 .7 to 3 .0 mg of nicotine . In the late 1950. and early 1960s t t hese values showed
progressive decreases .
6 To collect large amounta of cigarette smoke condensate for the akin-painting studies, the puff frequency used was three puffs per minute
rather than one puff per minute, the frequency closer to that used by smokers . The MS was trapped in Dry lce-chilled vessels .
3
resided in the MS CSC' . The MS vapor phase was subsequently shown to possess
very little tumorigenicity .
• Reports that the MS CSC contained several polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
and aza-arenes' previously demonstrated to be tumorigenic to mouse skin and several
phenols, nontumorigenic per se, previously reported to enhance or "promote" the
tumorigenicity of tumorigenic PAHs applied to laboratory animals at subtumorigenic
levels (see summary in Wynder and Hoffmann, 1967) .
• Reports from several laboratories (Wynder et al ., 1957a, 1957b ; Bock et al ., 1962)

that carcinoma production showed a dose response in laboratory animals skin-painted
with various levels of cigarette smoke condensate and that no carcinomas were
generated below a certain dose level .
The publication of the Advisory Committee's report to the 1964 Surgeon General
(USPHS, 1964) in which it was stated that "Cigarette smoking is a health hazard of
sufficient importance in the United States to warrant appropriate remedial action ."
The latter event provided the FTC with an official statement of the government's position
on tobacco smoking, particularly cigarette smoking, and a virtual mandate to require the
reporting of the "tar" yields from all U .S . cigarette brands .
In response to these reports, the U .S. cigarette manufacturers subsequently marketed

newly designed cigarette brands which provided a range of "tar" (and nicotine) yields, thus
enabling the consumer to choose a brand whose "tar" yield satisfied his/her concern about
smoking and health .
It should be noted that at the time of publication of the 1964 Report of the Advisory
Committee to the U .S. Surgeon General, nicotine in cigarette MS was not considered to be a
significant health hazard . It was stated (USPHS, 1964) :
Nicotine is rapidly changed in the body to relatively inactive substances with low toxicity . The
chronic toxicity of small doses of nicotine is low in experimental animals. These two facts, when
taken in coqjunction with the low mortality ratios of pipe and cigar smokers, indicate that the
chronic toxicity of nicotine in quantities absorbed from smoking and other methods of tobacco use
is low and probably does not represent an important health hazard .
7 MS CSC, closely related compusitionaily to the nnaterial subsequently defined as "tar," was reported to contain numerous tumorigenic
(mouse skin) polycyclic aroroatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) such as benzo(a1PYrend (Bap), tumorigenie au-arenes, and tobaeeo-speeifie IK
nitrosamines (rSNAs) such as N-nitrownornicotine (NNN) and 4-(*methyWunsamita)-t-(3-pyridinyi)-1-butanone (NMq . It is claimed
that the PAHs are responsible for the tumorigenicity of CSC to mouse skin, but their concentntions in CSC account for less than 296 of
the observed response . The renuinder of the observed tumorigenicity In such studies has not been accounted for . The /Knitrosamines are
organ specific tumorigene and play little, if any, role in the tumorigenicity of CSC to mouse skin .
~ Of all the groups itrve Wgating the aza-arenes in tobacco nnoke, none has been unable to duplicate the findings of Van Duuren et al . (1960a,
1960b) who reported the presence of dibenz[a,hjact4dine, dibenz(a,JJacddine, and 7R-dibenzo(c,glcarbazoie (see Rodgman, 1991, 1994) .
4
Subsequently, however, nicotine was alleged not only to be involved in coronary and
circulatory problems but also it was defined as the precursor of several tumorigenic tobacco and
MS components, the so-called tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNAs) such as N'-
nitrosonornicotine (NNN) and 4-(N-methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone (NNK)
(Hoffmann et al ., 1984, 1985, 1991a, 1991b ; Hoffmann, 1989) .
Soon after the publication of the 1964 Surgeon General's report (USPHS, 1964), the
following events occurred :
• The FTC began its activities to implement a labeling system for "tar" and nicotine
yields from cigarettes marketed in the U .S. As communications between the FTC and
the cigarette manufacturers proceeded, RJRT R&D personnel provided management
with pertinent information on the status of the analysis of MS for 'tar" and nicotine
(see Appendix B) . This information was used in attempts - obviously all
unsuccessful - to dissuade the FTC from pursuing its plan of implementing cigarette
pack labeling .
• The FTC alerted the U .S . cigarette manufacturers of its intentions (FTC, 1966),
vigorously pursued the implementation of an appropriate analytical method for the
determination of MS TPM, defined MS "tar" in terms of MS TPM, water, and
nicotine (Equation 1), promulgated the protocol of FTC procedure for the
determination of MS "tar" and nicotine yields (FTC, 1967a ; Pillsbury et al ., 1969),
and published the first FTC list of the MS "tar" and nicotine yields from 59 cigarette
brands marketed in the U .S. (FTC, 1967b) .
TPM = "tar" + nicotine + water Equation 1
The FTC procedure originally incorporated the best aspects of various methodologies
developed during the preceding three decades and subsequently was modified slightly
to include new and improved analytical techniques such as the determination of TPM
water and nicotine by gas chromatography . E.g ., the FTC procedure included the
smoking parameters (puff volume, duration, and interval) of Bradford et al. (1936),
collection of TPM on the Cambridge filter (Wartman et al ., 1959), pertinent aspects
of TPM nicotine analysis of Pfyl et al ., (1927), Pfyl (1933a, 1933b), Willits et al .
(1950), Griffith (1957), Ogg et al . (1962), Ogg (1964) and TPM water analysis of
Holmes and Cridlin (1960), Crowell et al. (1961), Jarrell and Wickham (1961, 1962),
Sloan and Sublett (1964, 1965), Schultz and Spears (1966) .
Because many of the analytical procedures to define the yields of cigarette MS TPM,
nicotine, water, and "tar" had been used for some years in the laboratories of
Tobacco Industry members in their product development studies, R&D representatives
from five of them° collaborated on a publication (Bates et al ., 1967, 1968) in which
9 L&M, Inc ; BdtW Tobacco Corp . ; American Tobacco Co . ; RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co. ; Philip Morria, Inc .
5
appropriate and Industry acceptable procedures for the determination and reporting
of MS TPM, TPM water, and TPM nicotine were described . The procedures were
essentially identical with those presented in the FTC protocol (Pillsbury et al ., 1969) .
• At the 1967 World Conference on Smoking and Health, a workshop involving some
30 presentations was devoted to the subject "Toward a Less Harmful Cigarette"
(Wynder and Hoffmann, 1968) . About two-thirds of the presentations dealt with the
composition and alleged adverse effects of "tar" in experimental situations .
• Under the auspices of the National Cancer Institute Smoking and Health Program, a
study, "Toward a Less Hazardous Cigarette," was implemented in 1968 and
continued for more than a decade . The summary report on the study was issued in
1980 (NCI, 1980) . R&D personnel from several of the major U .S. cigarette
manufacturers10 served on the NCI Tobacco Working Group as private citizens
knowledgeable in cigarette design and tobacco and tobacco smoke analysis,
composition, and properties .
1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
Numerous technologies 50 3 .0
introduced sequentially from the 45
mid-1950s to the late 1960s were n,tar Tlp. .!
42.5 °
40 Raoonatftut.d Tob .ooo She .t
incorporated into cigarette design P.p.r Additt...
P.per Porosity
to control MS delivery and I 35 ~ lspaad .d Tobaooo
0 1. -l 2 .0
composition. All are considered ~ V.nUlatlon
e~e 30
to contribute to what some have ~
characterized as a "less 25
ir
hazardous" cigarette when 20
included in cigarette design 8
15
(USPHS, 1979 ; NCI, 1980 ; Gori
and Bock, 1980 ; USPHS, 1981) . r 10 - Tar
••••••••• Nicotine
These technologies include : 5
• tobacco blend and 0 1956 .0
. 1960
L 1964
L L 1968 L
1972L 1976
L1980
AI1984 0
weight
• tobacco rod length and Figure 1 . "Tar" and Nicotine Deliveries, Sales Weighted Average
Basis
circumference
filter tips (material type
and additives)
• processed tobaccos (reconstituted tobacco sheet, expanded tobacco)
• paper (type and additives)
air dilution (increased paper porosity, filter tip perforations) .
The chronology of introduction of these technologies and their effects on sales weight average
10 LdtM, Inc . ; B&W Tobacco Cocp . ; P. Lodllard Co., Inc . ; RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co . ; Philip Morsis, Inc .
6
nicotine and "tar" yields are shown in Figure 1 . Over the years, the introduction and use of
these technologies in concert and to various degrees in cigarette design have provided the
consumer with a great variety of products whose number has increased from about a dozen in
the early 1950s to nearly 200 presently . The cigarette is a system : All the technologies used
in cigarette design are interactive . Le., inclusion of or change in the level of use of any
particular technology may require other adjustments in the cigarette design to maintain certain
attributes acceptable to the consumer . In contrast, by current technology, SS delivery is
controlled almost totally by tobacco blend and weight . The SS is not subjected to filtration, the
effect of filter-tip additives which specifically remove certain MS components from MS (phenols,
volatile N-nitrosamines), or air dilution effects .
In a continuation of their earlier reported mouse skin-painting studies, Wynder et al .

(1957a, 1957b) examined the effect of application of lower and lower total annual doses of MS
CSC on tumor production in skin-painted mice . They reported that skin painting of mice with
a total annual dose of 10 g/mouse produced papilloma in about 60% of the mice ; at a total
annual dose of 7 .5 g/mouse the percentage of papilloma-bearing animals was reduced to about
35 % . Only a small percentage (< 10%) of papilloma-bearing animals (but no carcinoma-
bearing) animals was observed when the total annual amount of MS CSC applied was less than
5 g/mouse; further reduction of the annual dose to 3 g/mouse resulted in no papilloma- or
carcinoma-bearing mice . These data are presented graphically in Flgure 2 . Thus, in this study,
reduction of the total annual dose from 10 g/mouse to 3 g/mouse reduced the percentage of
tumor-bearing animals from 60% to 0% . This represents a 3 .3-fold reduction in the dose of the
applied material, CSC . so r
These data from the dose- ro

response study (and the threshold
limit value for MS CSC) were
subsequently reported several 30
times by Wynder and Hoffmann ~
(1962, 1963, 1964, 1967) who ~ 40 stated in 1964 and again in 1967
: ,~ „
}~f
It is apparent that a V
reduction of
tumorig enic t0
components can be
most readily °a 3 4 6 e 7 s Y 10
accomplished by arams of Cisaratta smotce/llouae/Year
reducing the total Figure 2 . Relationship of Tumor Yield and Dose (Wynder et al .,
amount of smoke con- 1957b)
densate. . . to which one
is exposed . This has
been clearly shown
experimentally by dose-
response studies
[Wynder et al:, 1957a, Wynder and Hoffmann, 1962a, 1962b ; Bock et al., 1962] .
7
Wynder and Hoffmann (1965) determined the effect of MS CSC dose on tumor yield by
conducting lifetime sldn-painting studies in mice (50 mice per dilution) with various dilutions
of CSC-acetone suspensions. The results are shown in FIgure 3 . Skin painting with a fixed
volume of successive dilutions of a 50% CSC-acetone suspension reduced the percent tumor-
bearing animals from 45% with a 5096 suspension to 34 % with a 33% suspension, to 2036 with
a 25 % suspension, to 8% with a 10% suspension, and to 2% (one tumor-bearing mouse) with
a 5% suspension, i.e., a 10-fold dilution of the CSC-acetone suspension produced a 25-fold
diminution in % tumor-bearing animals . From their results, Wynder and Hoffmann (1965)
noted:
It is apparent. . .from
laboratory studies . . .that so
exposure to tobacco - 60X
-- 33X
smoke condensate and $ax
tumor yield are -- 109
quantitatively - - 5%
correlated . 51
A few years earlier,

Wynder (1961) had commented on
the effect of dose reduction on
tumor yield in laboratory animals
painted with CSC . Because he
................ .`
used much more reasonable doses _._. . ..-
. .. . . .
of CSC in his slcin painting, . . ..-•
.
.~ , ,
Passey in England was unable to 1 s a 7 0 0 m 11 /u 13 14 1s 16 17 ls
confirm the findings of Wynder et YONTHS

al. (1953a,, 1953b) . Wynder's
explanation was as follows :
What reAlly happened Figure 3 . Tumor Response to Different Doses of Cigarette Smoke
was that y applied Condensate in Acetone (Wynder & Hoffmann, 1965) .
too weak a coneent-
ration of to smoke
condensate to his
animals. Of course,
since tobacco ke is
only a weak carc ogen
to begin with, if u
dilute its concentra too markedly, it is no wonder that you do not obtain any cancer . It would
be just like a human , ing smoking one or two cigarettes a day without inhaling it . His risk of
developing lung cancer`would certainly also not be greater than that of a non-smoker . . .
[From] a study which we have done on the dose response of different amounts of smoke condensate to the
production of skin cancer in mice . . . (y]ou will note that, if we applied to the mouse 5 g or less per year
of tobacco smoke condensate we were not able to produce any cancers . This of course explains the failure
of Dr. Passey_to repeat our work . But it clearly shows that tobacco smoke condensate is not a very strong
carcinogen .
8
The importance of dose (exposure) was reiterated in tlie same language by Wynder and
Hoffmann in their lengthy 1964 review article (Wynder and Hoffmann, 1964) and 1967 book
(Wynder and Hoffmann, 1967) on tobacco :and tobacco smoke:
Since 1953, when the first large-scale prod4ction of epidermoid cancer was reported, many
investigators have verified these findings . Some ri~ativeftndings (Shotadze, 1953 ; Gwynn, 1954 ;
Passey et al., 1954; Kakhiani, 1955 ; Hamer and Wbpdhouse, 1956 ; Gwynn and Salaman, 1956)
are largely, if not exelusively, a result of tnadequate~dQse . (Emphasis addedr AR)
.,
Wynder and Hoffmann (1964, 1967) also noted that Gritsiute and Mironova (1960)
reported only 3 (1 .7%) tumor-bearing animals (TBA) out of 174 animals treated with between
1 .4 and 2 .6 g of CSC over a 10-month period whereas their own studies gave 44% TBA in
animals treated with 11 .7 g of CSC over a 15-month period . When the difference in treatment
time is disregarded, a dose reduction ranging from 4 .5 to 8 reduced the % TBA by a factor of ~
26!
Because of the dose-response relationships reported in the human epidemiological studies

and the dose-response relationships in the biological studies conducted with CSC-painted
laboratory animals, the FTC proposed that the consumer should know the "tar" deliveries of
marketed cigarettes in order to make an informed choice of his/her brand, depending on his/her
degree of concern about the reported relationship between smoking and certain disease entities .
In the period 1964-1966, numerous memoranda were prepared in which reasons for the
FTC not to continue with its efforts to label cigarette packages were outlined . The salient points
advanced by RJRT R&D personnel to dissuade the FTC are summarized in Appendix B . These
arguments and similar ones advanced by other Industry members were unsuccessful .
On 25 March 1966, the FTC (FTC, 1966) announced it had sent identical letters to each
of the major U .S . cigarette manufacturers in regard to factual statements of "tar" and nicotine
content on labels and in advertising of cigarettes :
Gentlemen :
. The Cigarette Advertising Guides promulgated by the Commission in September 1955

provided that no representation should be made that "any brand of cigarette or the smoke
therefrom is low in nicotine or tars * * * when it has not been established by competent scientific
proof applicable at the time of dissemination that the claim is true, and if true, that such difference
or differences are significant ." On the basis of the facts now available to it, the Commission has
determined that a factual statement of the tar and nicotine content (expressed in milligrams) of the
mainstream smoke from a cigarette would not be in violation of such Guides, or of any of the
provisions of law administered by the Commission so long as (1) no collateral representations
(other than factual statements of tar and nicotine contents of cigarettes offered for sale to the
public) are made, and (2) the statement of tar and nicotine content is supported by adequate
records of tests conducted with the Cambridge Filter Method, as described in an article entitled
"Determination of Particulate Matter and Alkaloids (as Nicotine) in Cigarette Smoke," by C .L .
Ogg, which appeared in the Journal of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, Vol . 47,
No. 2, 1964- It is the Commission's position that it is in the public interest to promote the
9
/
dissemination of truthful information concerning cigarettes which may be materia) and desired by
the consuming public .
By direction of the Commission. Joseph W . Shea, Secretary .
During discussions between U .S . cigarette manufacturers and the FTC in the mid-1960s,
it was pointed out by industry representatives that labeling cigarette packs with the amounts of
MS "tar" and nicotine delivered by the cigarette smoked under standard laboratory conditions
would not inform the smoker of the precise amount or composition of the "tar" received during
his/her smoking of the cigarette (see Appendix B) .
The reporting of nicotine as a separate MS component derived from the fact that it and
water are the two most plentiful components in MS TPM . In the early 1960s when the FTC
began its efforts to require "tar" and nicotine reporting, extensive studies were underway to
define MS composition . The number of identified MS components had increased from about 80
in 1954 (Kosak, 1954) to about 800 in 1965 . Currently, the number of identified components
in MS exceeds 4,500 . Thus in the early 1960s, MS "tar," except for nicotine and water, was
a poorly defined material .
B. Origins of Smoking Parameters (Puff Volume, Puff Duration, Puff Frequency, etc .)
As noted previously, the FTC's desire to catalog cigarettes by their "tar" and nicotine
delivery stemmed from the various claims in the scientific and medical literature that certain
health problems arose in cigarette smokers as a result of their inhalation of the components
constituting MS "tar" and the dose response relationships reported in epidemiological studies
with smokers and biological studies with laboratory animals . The following relationship has been
used for over three decades to calculate the value of the "tar" delivered in cigarette MS :
total particulate matter = "tar" + nicotine + water
The values for the major smoking parameters (puff volume, duration, and frequency) can
be traced to the publication of Bradford et al. (1936) who selected a puff volume of 35 ml, a
puff duartion of 2 sec, and a puff frequency of 1 puff/60 sec . Actually, only the puff duration
of 2 sec 'was similar to that observed with cigarette smokers . The other two values were less
than the observed average puff volume and frequency . The values for these three cigarette
smoking parameters persisted for the next three decades .
For a given cigarette brand, the FTC numbers for "tar," nicotine, and more recently
carbon monoxide are obtained via a precisely defined smoking regime and analytical methods
[preconditioning of cigarettes (23 .9°C; relative humidity, 60% ; conditioning time, 24 hr) ;
smoking parameters - 35-ml puff volume, 2-sec puff duration, 1 puff/min ; 23.9°C, 60%
relative humidity, cigarette smoked to a defined butt length].
In contrast to the rigorously defined FTC smoking and analytical procedures for the
determination of cigarette MS "tar," nicotine, and more recently carbon monoxide :
10
• Few smokers, if any, in the smoking of a cigarette take in the TPM amount found
in the FTC determination .
• Few smokers smoke their cigarettes to as short a butt length as in the FTC procedure .
• Because of involvement in other tasks, the smokers often place their cigarette in an
ash tray for a brief time, thus missing one or more puffs on the cigarette . Few
smokers take the number of puffs obtained for a given cigarette brand in the FTC
procedure. The smoking machine used in the FTC method is relentless ; it never
misses a puff on the cigarette under test!
• Whereas the smoking parameters (35-ml puff, 2-sec duration, 1 puff/min) in the FTC
procedure are those originally proposed by Bradford et al . (1936), proposed again by
Ogg (1964), accepted by the tobacco industry (Bates et al ., 1967, 1968) and the FTC
(FTC, 1966 ; Pillsbury et al., 1969), individual smokers varied considerably from the
FTC-dictated values, e .g., puff volumes ranged from 32 .8 to 53 .4 ml, puff durations
ranged from 1 .53 to 2 .77 sec at 1 .8 puffs/min in a study conducted close to the time
of the FTC activities (Adams, 1966) .
• In contrast to human smokers, the smoking machine used in the FTC procedure does
not "exhale. " It has been reported in numerous studies that individual cigarette
smokers vary considerably . They were found to exhale between 10 and 75 % of the
TPM inspired during the puffs taken to consume the cigarette, thus retaining between
25% and 90% of the inspired TPM" (cf., Piehl, 1970) .
Another problem, long recognized by tobacco scientists but ignored by the FTC, is the
fact that the MS "tars" from two different cigarette brands delivering the same weight of "tar,"
e.g., 25 mg, may be quite different compositionally because entirely different technologies were
incorporated in the design of the two brands to achieve the 25-mg "tar" delivery. Examples of
this are found in the reports of the National Cancer Institute on its 10-year study on "less
hazardous" cigarettes . Various cigarette design technologies were investigated to determine their
effect on MS yield, MS chemical composition, and MS CSC biological activity (mouse-skin
painting) (Gori, 1976a, 1976b, 1977, 1980 ; NCI, 1980) . Overall, the relationships among
tobacco blend compositions, MS compositions, and biological activities of the CSCs from nearly
100 test and some 30 standard and reference cigarettes were studied . Nine of the cigarette
samples showed "tar" yields ranging from 27 .0 to 27 .4 mg. As shown in Table IA, despite the
uniformity in "tar" deliveries from these cigarettes, their MSs - both the particulate phases and
vapor phases - were quite disparate compositionally as shown by the data, normalized to "tar"
yield, and the ranges listed for the normalized data .
t~ % retentiona of MS TPM much lower then the 90% described in the literature were reported by Whisnant and Stevenson (1969c) at RJRT .
In a detailed in-houae studies at RJRT R&D, .rooken were found to retain between SO and 65 % of the TPM inspired .
11
Table 1
Variations In Mainstream Smoke Composition for Cigarettes Delivering 27 .2 f 0 .2 mg of "Tar"
AnalyldCigt. No. Id,' 1-23° II-42' 1I-44' 1II-74a III-81' IV-26' IV-31a IV-67° Range
Per Cigarette Dedvery
`Yar" i mg 27.4 27.4 27.3 27.4 27 .4 27.3 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.0-27. 4
'tar"P'taq.d" 1 .007 1 .007 1 .004 1 .007 1 .007 1 .004 0 .993 0 .996 1 .000
nicatinei mg 2 .07 1 .39 1 .93 1 .80 1.80 1 .91 3 .25 0 .89 1 .84 0.89-3 .2 3
'Yar"/nioot6ne 13 .2 19.7 14.1 15 .2 15.2 14.4 8.3 30.4 14.8 8.3-30 . 4
Amount ofComponent Relative to "Tar "
BaPj µg/g 0.91 0 .68 0.58 0.79 1 .04 1 .18 0.72 0.82 0.64 0 .38-1 .1 8
BaA ° µglg 1 .40 0 .92 1 .08 0.90 1 .49 1 .64 1 .01 1 .00 1 .42 0 .90-1 .64
pheaol mg/g 3.95 2.98 3.83 3.90 4.28 4.62 4.85 3.07 6.10 2 .98-6 .1 0
ocresol mg/g 0.72 0.51 0.62 0.63 0.77 0.79 0.72 0.57 nd 0.51-0 .79
aoetaldehyde 39.1 42 .6 37.9 36.1 38.4 39.9 19.6 25.1 34.9 19.6-42.6
mg/g
HCN mg/g 6.11 4.2' 12.2 12.0 13.3 12.1 9.8 13 .0 12.5 9.8-13 .3 °
NO' mg/g 9.6 8.0 9.4 8 .7 10.8 10.0 33.7 11 .3 12.8 8.0-33 .7
Tschnology Investigated; other notes :
' I!i contained double the nitrate level of control blend SRH-I (1).
° Higb deosity reooos<itutad tobacco (RTS), slurry process (1 b
` Dupllcate aatnplea ofoonttol blend SE&I1(2}
° Cantrol blend SEB-III (aoatained 3 .2 Bti glyoaol) (3).
' Olycerol omitted from control blend SEB-1II (3).
Full redum of cut rolled burley rtmn (4).
a Niontine in SFR-IV blend adjuRed iu► that dgarette delivered MS nicotine at 1 .0 mg/ciQl. (4).
" SEB-IV blend with 1 .3l5 of m additive to reduoe MS iartstion.
' MS "ur' and nicotine deiamined by the FTC prooedure .
BaP - benno[a]pynaw t BaA - benz[a]anthraome
~ Subeaquaot HCN malyua for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th series involved an improved and more accurate analytical prooedura
° Becauae of analytical problem . HCN data from SEB-1 samples were omitted from ranga
In the original e epocts, nrtrogien oiddea were expnxsed as NO= . Sinoe it has been demwstrated that more than 95 %
of the nitrogen oxides in tobacco smoke is nitric oxide (NO) (5), the nitrogen oxddes data were recalculated accordingly .
Table 2
Variations in Mainstream Smoke Composition for Cigarettes Delivering 25 .5 f 0 .4 mg of "Tar"
tlaaavtolCiai Nu. jx 11-53~ ID-73` -ITI g2° fII-93e IV-13t IN'-29a [uV,-32a $em
Per Cigarette Detivery
"tar" ° mg 25 .9 25 .9 25 .5 25 .5 25 .1 25 .4 25 .1 25 .7 25 .1-25 .9
`har"PYarW3 " 1 .016 1 .016 1 .000 1 .000 0.984 0.996 0.984 1 .008
nivulvne ° mg 1 .68 0 .38 1 .67 1 .78 1 .18 0.16 2.02 1 .91 0.16-2 .02
"lar'Yniaatide 15.4 68 .2 15 .3 14.3 21 .3 158.8 12.4 13.5 12 .4-159
.4mount ofComponent Relative to "Tar"
BaP I µg/g 0.72 0.54 1 .06 1 .16 1 .56 0.76 0 .78 0 .66 0 .54-1 .56
BoAJ µglg 1 .20 0.87 1 .56 1 .54 2 .35 1 .03 1 .05 1 .72 0 .87-2 .33
pheaol mg/g 4 .35 3 .26 4.05 4 .89 3 .71 4 .99 4 .44 3 .53 3 .26-4.99
otresol mg/g 0.78 0.57 0.86 0.82 0 .73 0.40 0 .59 0 .63 0 .40-0 .80
aataldehyde 41 .1 35.0 46.0 41 .8 36 .7 30 .6 39,2 39 .3 30.6-46.0
HCN ~gg 7 .e 11 .3 12.6 12 .0 9.7 11 .1 12 .7 12 .6 9.7-12 .7'

NO ° mg/g 9 .2 2.0 10.5 10.8 7 .4 10.9 11 .4 11 .4 2.0-11 .4
Technology fmrutlgated .• other nota:
' Cigarotte faFxioetad with SRR-1 Mend and medium panMity, citrrtetrcated parer (1).
° Cigaralte fabricated with Iow-0loat6te flue aued tobacco grown with nonnal nitrogea feftifuatian (2) .
' Contr+ol SE&III blend (3).
• ° SEB-III blend with added cocoa (1 .0 %) (3).

' Tobaoco subatituta (Cytrelm):SEB-III blard - 30:70 (3).
~ Datioatiaized SEBd1I blend (3) .
' SEB-IV control blend (4) .
h MS "tar" and niootitta detecmined by the FTC prooedure .
' BaP - beivo[a]pyrene ~ BaA - benz[a)anthraane
k Subsequent HCN analysea for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th series involved an improved and more aoourate analytial
p~a
' Hecaux of analytical problem, HCN result from SEB-1 sample 1-2 was omitted from range .
'" In the origina/ repocts, nhrog,ea o)ddes were expressed as NO3 . Sinx it has been demaostnnad that more tban
95% of Ihn nilrulgnn uxides 6n tubauw wrxukn ia nilriu oxide (NO) (S), the nilnVe oxidex data were reuslwlatexl
aooordingly.
~ . Gori, G .B. (Editor) Report No . 1. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The FJrst Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW Publ. No . (NIH) 1976, 76-905 .
2. Gori, G .B. (Editor) Report No. 2. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The Second Set of
Experimental Cigarettes. DHEWPubI. No. (NIH) 1976, 76-1111 .
3. Gori, G.B. (Editor) Report No. 3. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes The Third Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW Publ. No. (NIH) 77-1280.
4. Gori, G.B . (Editor) Report No. 4. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The Fourth Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW PubG (NIH) March (1980) .
s. Cooper P.J. ; and Hege, R.B. The Oxidation of NO to NO= in Cigarette Smoke . 32nd Tob . Chem. Res. Ln
Conf., Montreal PQ, Canada, 1978 : Paper No . 34 . N
~
N
CO
m
-j
Table 3
Component:"Tar" Ratios of Deliveries of Selected Components in Fresh Mainstream Smoke
from Commercial Cigarettes Designed to Yield Different "Tar" Levels'
AnalytelCigt . Type Cigt A (NF) b Cigt B (F) Cigt C (F) Cigt D(P17
Per Cigarette Delivery
"tar" mg 20.1 15 .6 6 .8 0.90

nicotine mg 2 .04 1 .50 0 .81 0.15
Amount of Component Relative to "Tar"
"tar" g/g 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00

nicotine 919 0 .10 0.10 0 .12 0.17
benzo[a]pyrene µg/g 1 .30 1 .14 1 .79 2.44
N-nitrosodimethylamine µg/g 1 .55 0.20 1 .78 4.46
N-nitrosopyrrolidine µg/g 3 .21 0.65 4 .81 14.67
N'-nitrosoanatabine + 6.37 47.69 77.06 113 .3
N'-nitrosoanabasine µg/g
.N'-nitrosonornicotine µg/g 50.10 31 .28 40.15 73.67
4-(N-methylnitrosamino)-1- 21 .14 11 .54 8 .26 19.22
(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone µg/g
catechol mg/g 2.08 4 .56 3 .96 10.11
' Dats from Adanu et aL (g .

"NF - nao6haed dgarene; F - 6ha4ipped aguatta
PF - perfaated 6halippad dgaette
~ . Gorl, G.B . (Editor) Report No . 1 . Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The F7rst Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW Publ. No. (NIH) 1976, 76-905.
2. Gori, G.B. (Editor) Report No. 2. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes . The Second Set of
Experimental Cigarettes. DHEW PubL No. (NIH) 1976, 76-1111 .
3. Gori, G .B . (Editor) Report No. 3. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The Third Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW PubL No. (NIH) 77-1280.
,. Gori, G .B. (Editor) Report No. 4. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. The Fourth Set of Experimental
Cigarettes. DHEW Publ. (NIIQ March (1980) .
s. Cooper P.J. ; Hege, RB. The Oxidation of NO to NOZ in Cigarette Smoke . 32nd Tob. Chem . Res.
Conf., Montreal PQ, Canada, 1978 : Paper No. 34.
6. Adams, J .D. ; O'Mara-Adams, K.J. ; Hoffmann, D . To)dc and carcinogenic agents in undiluted
mainstrcam smokc and sidcstrcam smoke of different typcs of cigarittcs . Carctnogenesis 1987, 8,
729-731
TABLE 1A : VARIATIONS IN MS COb1FOSITION FOR CIGARETTES
DELIVERING 27.2 ± 0.2 mg OF "TAR"
AxWYtc/Sjai .Ns, L-o: L-= I-C II-W IDZ4°. ID w 1.:3e w-31' e Am
Per Qgareae Dellrery
"ur"' cog/ci8t 27 .4 27.4 27 .3 27 .4 27 .4 27.3 27 .0 27 .1 27.2 27.0-27 .4

•'ur' y' 4ary,e„ 1 .007 1 .007 1 .004 1 .007 1 .007 1 .004 0.993 0.996 1 .000
nkotinet mg/clgt 2.07 1 .39 1 .93 1 .80 1 .80 1 .91 3 .25 0.99 1 .94 0.89-3 .25
"ar"/nicotine ratio 13 .2 19 .7 14.1 13 .2 15 .2 14 .4 8 .3 30.4 14.8 8 .3-30.4
Amount oJ Component Re(ative w'7or••
BaPi Itg/j* 0 .91 0 .68 0 .58 0.79 1 .04 1 .18 0 .72 0 .82 0 .64 0 .58-1 .18
BaAt µg/g 1 .40 0 .92 1 .08 0 .90 1 .49 1 .64 1 .01 1 .00 1 .42 0 .90-1 .64
phenol aWg 3 .95 2 .98 3 .83 3 .90 4.28 4 .62 4 .88 3 .07 6 .10 2 .98-0 .10
ocrerol mg/= 0.72 0.51 0.62 0 .63 0.77 0 .79 0.72 0.57 ad 0 .31-0 .79
aceWdehyde ng/g 39 .1 42 .6 37.9 36 .1 38 .4 39.9 19 .6 25 .1 34 .9 19 .6-42 .6
HCN n4g/j 6 .11 4.21 12.2 12 .0 13 .3 12 .1 9.8 13 .0 12 .5 9 .8-13 .3°
NO' aS/j 9 .6 8 .0 9 .4 8.7 10.8 10 .0 33 .7 11 .3 12 .8 8 .0•33 .7
Technofogy tnvrrdgaad; other norer:
• 1-6 coataiued double the nitrate level of control biend S8&I (God, 1976a) . I so 3~ ~
b High density reconstituted tobacco (ATS), slurry procew (God, 1976a) .
° Duplicate samples of control blend SBB-11(Ciod, 1976b) .
e Control blood SB&lII (contaiaed 3 .2 !i glyceroq (Ooei, 1977) . ~ C L ~ J
• Olyceroi omitted fmm control blood S88-m (God, 1977) . i S1 ~
r Full retura of cut rolled burley aems (()ori. 1980) . ~ S 3
s Nieotine In SB&N blood adjusted so that eigareua delivered MS nicotine at 1 .0 mg/cigt (Ciorl, 1980) .
~ S8B-N blood .vith 1 .5 % of an additive to reduce MS irdtation .
t MS "tar" and aicodns determined by the FTC procedure .
J B.P = benzo(aJpyeww k BaA - beoz(a)aat6ncane
~ Sub .equent HCN aaalysas foe the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th asria involved an iaaproved and nwn accurate analytical procedure .
m Becauss of analytical probbm, HCN data fi= S88-1 smopies Mm omitted 6om raaè .
° In du oeiSiaal roports, aioropa osid .a .rorev exprewd as NOp Sioce it hu been deawa°trated that more than 9S9i of the
nitrogeu oxides In tobacco soatA is s3teia oxide (NO), dw nierojea oxides data were recalculated aoooedaqtly .
In the same NCI study, another set of eight cigarette samples whose "tar" yields were
equivalent at 25 .5 f 0.4 mg showed similar disparate compositions in their MS particulate and
vapor phases (Table IB) .
12
TABLE 1B : VARIATIONS IN MS COMPOSITION FOR CIGARETTF.S
DELIVERING 25.5 t 0.4 mg OF "TAR"
,AnaIXJ2/S' .tio. L-Z D'- r L3£9 IYUL& Bi!oe4
Per agarette Deuvery
"tar"e mg/cigt 25 .9 25 .9 2S .S 25 .5 25 .1 25 .4 25 .1 25 .7 25 .1-25 .9
"tar"/"urtp,.q•' 1 .016 1 .016 1 .000 1 .000 0 .984 0 .996 0 .984 1 .008 ~

~ ;.
nicotined mg/cigt 1 .68 0.38 1 .67 1 .78 1 .18 0 .16 2 .02 1 .91 0 .16-2 .02
"tar"/nicotine ratio 15 .4 68.2 15 .3 14 .3 21 .3 158 .8 12 .4 13 .S 12 .4-158
Amount oj Compor+ent Relatrve to "Tar"
Ba0 µg/g 0 .72 0 .54 1 .06 1 .16 1 .56 0 .76 0 .78 0.66 0 .54-1 .56
BeAI µg/g 1 .20 0 .87 1 .56 1 .54 2.35 1 .03 1 .05 1 .72 0 .87-2 .35
phenol mg .r .".,3; 3 .26 4.055 4 .89 3 ;71 4,99 4 .33 3 .53 3 .26-4.99•
acreaol mg/g 0 .78 0.57 0 .86 0 .82 0.73 0 .40 0 .59 0 .63 0.40-0 .80
acetaldehyde mg/g 41 .1 35 .0 46 .0 41 .8 36 .7 30 .6 39 .2 39 .3 30 .6-46 .0

9.I .' I
HCN mg/g 7 .8k 11 .3 12 .6 12 .0 9 .7 11 .1 12 .7 12 .6 9 .7-12 .7'
NO1O mg/g 9 .2 2 .0 10.5 10 .8 7 .4 10 .9 11 .4 11 .4 2 .0-11 .4
Technology tnvest/gated; other notes:
' Cigarette fabricated with SEB-I blend and medium porosity, citrate-treated paper (Gori . 1976a) .
b cigarette fabricated with low-nicotine flue cured tobacco grown with normal nitrogen fertilization (Oori, 1976b) .
° Control SEB-III blend ~(t3~ori, i~~'7):
e SEB-III blend with addZd-o" (1 .0 %) (Gori, 1977) .
• Tobaceo substitute (GytreN) :SEB-m blend - 30:70 (dori, 1977) .
t Denicotinized SSB-III blend (Qod, 1977) .
a SEB-IV control blend (God, 1980) .
b MS "tar" and nicotine determined by the FfC procedure .
I BaP - benzo[alpyrene 1 BaA - benz[a)anthracene
4 Subsequent HCN anaiyaea for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th aeriea involved an improved and more accurate analytical
procedure.
t Beeau.e of analytical problem, HCN result from SEB-I sample 1-2 was omitted from range .
m In the original reports, nitrogen oxldes were expressed as NO= . Since it has been demonstrated that more than 9596
of the nitrogen oxides in tobacco smoke ia nitric oxide (NO), the nitrogen oxides data were recalculated accordingly .
Cigarette design technologies for the cigarettes listed in Tables 1A and 1B included RTS
inclusion, stem inclusion, tobacco substitute inclusion, nitrate enhancement, humectant (glycerol)
effect, tobacco additives, e .g., cocoa, nicotine adjustment, use of high porosity citrate-treated
cigarette paper . Several of these together with other technologies (expanded tobacco, perforated
filter tips, filter-tip additives) have been used in concert and to different degrees to attain specific
"tar" yields . ranging from 0 .1 to over 40 mg .
Another anomaly ignored was the fact that the "tars" from different types of cigarettes
i .e ., those cigarettes rated ultralow-, low-, medium-, and high-"tar" on the basis of "tar" yields
• determined by FTG analysis, may be quite different compositionally . The consumer smoking a
15-mg "tar" cigarette is inhaling "tar" entirely different in composition from the "tar" in the
13
MS of a cigarette whose "tar" yield is 20 mg or 7 mg . Examination of the data (Adams et al.,
1987) in Table 2 for four different U .S. commercial cigarettes indicates the significant variations
in individual component : "tar" ratios for several MS components of interest .
TABLE 2: COMFONENT :"TAR" RATIOS OF DELIVERIES FOR

SELECTED COMPONENTS IN FRESH MAINSTREAM
SMOKE FROM COMMERCIAL CIGARETTES DESIGNED
TO YIELD DIFFERENT "TAR" LEVELS'
CiQt A(NF1° Cigt B (F) Cigt C (F) Cigt D(PF)
Per Cigarette Delivery

. . r„ mg/cigt 20.1 15 .6 6 .8 0 .90
ta
nicotine mg/cigt 2 .04 1 .50 0 .81 0 .15
Amount of Component Relative to "Tar"

. .tar,t g/g 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00
nicotine g/g 0 .10 0.10 0 .12 0 .17
benzo[a]pyrene Ng/g 1 .30 1 .14 1 .79 2 .44
N-nitrosodimethylamine Ng/g 1 .55 0.20 1 .78 4 .56
N-nitrosopyrrolidine .Ug/g 3 .21 0 .65 4 .81 14.67
N'-nitrosoanatabine +
N'-nitrosoanabasine llg/g 6 .37 47 .69 77 .06 113 .33
N'-nitrosonornicotine IiS/g 50 .10 31 .28 40.15 73 .67
4-(N-methylnitrosamino)-1-
(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone Ng/g 21 .14 11 .54 8 .26 19 .22
catechol mg/g 2 .08 4 .56 3 .96 10 .11
' Data from Ad .ma er al . (1987) .

b NP - nonfiltered ; F- filtered; PF - perforated filter
14
III. REPRODUCIBLE ANALYTICAL METHODS
Between the Bradford et al. (1936) publication and the implementation of the FTC
smolring method for the determination of cigarette MS "tar" and nicotine yields, there were
other analyses used for this purpose . The details of the five most commonly used procedures are
summarized in Table 3 . Other details of these procedures plus comments on the events occurring
at the time of the FTC's involvement in the "tar" and nicotine labeling are summarized in
Appendix B .
TABLE 3 : METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF TOTAL SOLIDS AND NICOTINE
L&M Tobacco Co .
Method (Keith and
The Consumer Newsome, 1956,
Union's Method Cambridge Filter 1957, 1958 ;
Smoking Wolman Method (Consumer Method (Wartman Foster D . Snell Newsome and Keith,
Condjtiona, ete . (Wolman . 1953) Reoorta . 1955) sr al. . 1959) Method (Kimball) 1936 . 1957)
cigarette length 47 variable ; depends 47 variable ; depends variable ; depends on

smoked, nvn on length of on length of length of cigarette
cigarette being cigarette being being tested
tested tested
butt length, mm variable ; depends 23 variable ; depends 23 variable ; depends on

on length of on length of length of cigarette
tested tested
number of puffs number required to number required to number required to number required to 14
consume 47 mm of attain 23-mm butt consume 47 nun of attain 23-mm butt
cigarette length cigarette length
puff volume 33 35 35 35 44
puff duration 2 .0 2.0 2 .0 1 .9
puff frequency, I 1 1. 1 2
no ./min
lab temp ., °C 25° not specified not apecified not specified 23 .90
lab RH, %- 45% not specified not specified not specified 60%
cigarettes smoked 5 8 10 5 10'

per determination
cigarette selection selected for selected for selected for selected for selected for
uniformity in uniformity in uniformity in uniformity in uniformity in
moisture content, moisture content, moisture content, moisture content, moisture content,
cigarette aize (if cigarette aize (if cigarette size (if cigarette size (if cigarette size (if
feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feasible), weight,
firmneu, and other firmness, and other firmness, and other firnuxaa, and other firmness, and other
chancteriatica characteristics characteristics characteristics characteristics
15
Table 3. Continued :
L .dcM Tobacco Co .
Method (Keith and
Union's Method Cambridge Filter 1957,1958 ;
Smoking Wolman Method (Consumer Method (Wntnun Foster D. Snell Newsome and Keith,
Conditions, etc . (Wolman . 1953) Reoons. 1935) er o1 . . 1959) Method (Kimball) 1956, 1957)
determination of SoHds (designated Smoke for deter- Cigarette MS Is To determine soUds The smoke in this
total solids as tars in the mination of both collected on a glass (tar content In the method is retained
publication) are nicotine and solids fiber filter material, communi-cat'wn), on an a-cellulose
determined by Is absorbed in Cambridge filter smoke is collected trap . The a-cellulose
gravity deposition acidified alcohol . medium CM-1 13 . in acidified alcohol . Is washed with hot
of smoke over 25 One portion of the The weight of The alcohol acidic methanol . The
m1of0.1N acidified alcoholic material retained in solution Is heated solution Is extracted
sullbric acid . The solution Is diluted the filter represents on a steam bath with chloroform . To
mixture is extracted with water, then total solids (total (100'C) to deter-mine soUds
with chloroform, extracted with particulate matter) . evaporate the (termed tar in the
and the chloroform chloroform. The Part of the material alcohol. After publications), the
extract Is heated to aqueous layer ia retained on the about 5 hr, the chloroform solution
evaporate the nude alkaline and Cambridge filter Is residue is heated in is evaporated on the •
chloroform . The re-extracted with water. Thus . this the beaker at steam bath and
residue Is then chloroform. The method includes 105°C for 7 hr. heating is continued
heated, or dried, two chloroform water In the value The weight of for 3 hr at 105°C .
for 3 hr at 100°C. extracts are com- for total aolida, material remaining Tar value is
The weight of bined, and the whereas the in the beaker Is determined by
remaining material chloroform Wolman Method designated as the weighing the
after the heating ia removed by and the Consumers tar content. residue .
reported as tars . evaporation to yield Union Method do
the tar, which Is not. .
weighed .
determination of Solids for deter• Another portion of To determine To determine The extracted
nicotine mination of the acidified nicotine, the nicodne, an aliquot methanol solution is
ntcodne are alcoholic solution is Cambridge filter of the acidified made alkaline and is
collected over 10 treated with base with the retained alcohol solution steam-distilled .
ml alcohol acidified and steamdistilled . solids is extracted containing the Mcodnt is deter-
with sulfuric acid Mcodne in the with 0.1 Nsulfuric smoke solids is mined In the steam
in a 300-m1 steam distillate Is acid . The solution, heated to remove distillate spectro-
1Cjeldahl flask. measured spectro- after washing with the alcohol, the photometrically.
Solution ia treated photometrically. chbroform, Is residue Is made
with alkali and then made alkaline and alkaline and Is
steam-distilled . The Is steam-distilled. steam-distilled.
distillate Is treated Nicotine in the Wlcodns is deter-
with silicotungstlc steam distillate Is mined gnvimetri-
acid to precipitate determined either cally in the steam
the silicotungaute . by the aiGcotungstio distiWte (siGco-
The silleotungatate acid method or by tungstic acid
Is aeparated and Is the spectrophoto• method) .
ignited to an ash metric method .
whose weight Is
used to calculate
the nicotine valueb .
' The authors recommended that three to six such determinations be carried out and the results averaged .
b Since other alkaloids coprecipitate with nicotine as silicotungstates, thia determination yields the alkaloid or total alkaloid
value .
•
16
Table 4 summarizes the chronology of the various analytical procedures proposed and
used for the determination of cigarette MS "tar" and nicotine yields .
TABLE 4: MAINSTREAM SMOKE "TAR" AND NICOTINE DETER-

MINATIONS
The Pre-FTC Era' The FTC Era T6e Ultralow-"Tar" Era
Wolman Method (Wolman, 1953) FTC Methodab (FPC, 1%7a) Spectrophotometcic Methodad : For
determining "tar" yield of cigarettes
designed to deliver < 2 mg/cigt
Consumer Union's Method - No . I ISO Methods (ISO, 1986, 1987s, 1987b,

(Consumer Reports, 1955) 1989a,198b)
Cambridge Filter Method (Wartman et al., CORESTA Methods (CORESTA, 1966s,

1959) 1966b, 1966c, 1966d, 1969s, 1969b,
1986, 1987, 1989s, 1989b)
Foster D. -Sneil MethoJ (Kimball)° DIN Methods (Verband, 1965)
LecM Tobacco Co . Method (Keith and UK Methods (Bentley and Burgan, 1961)
Newaome, 1956, 1957, 1958; Newsome
and Keith, 1916, 1957)
' For complete details on these five methods, aee Appeodt : B .

b FTC methods Incotporate contributions of Bradford et al. (1936), Griffith, (1957), Wartman et ol . (1959), Ogg et al .
(1960, 1962), Ogg (1964) ; rf. Bates et al . (1967, 1%8) .
° 7he Reader'r Digest (Riia, 1950; Norr, 1952; Miller and Monahan, 1957s, 19S7b, 1957c, 1958s, 1958b, 1959, 1961, 1966,
1968• ; Miller, 1958, 1%2 ; Ratcliff, 1959) in ita continued attack against cigarette smoking had retained Foster D . Snell,
Inc . to determine the "tar" and nicotine yields from U .S . (Miller and Monahan, 19S7b, 1958s, 1958b, 1959, 1961, 1966)
and Canadian (Miller and Monahan, 1957c) cigarettes .
d For details on these methods, aee Appmdbc C .
• in thia article, Miller and Monahan (1968) cite FTC (6TC, 1968) not Foater D . Snell data .
IV. DI]FFERENCES BETWEEN FTC AND OTHER METHODS
Debardeleben et al . (1991) presented a very fine review of the determination of "tar"

and nicotine in cigarette smoke from an historical point-of-view . They included discussion of the
following topics and how certain procedures eventually were included in standard methods of
analysis such as the FTC procedure and the CORESTA and ISO procedures :
• Smoking machines
• Smoking parameters
- the origins of puff volume, puff duration, puff interval, butt length'=
• Smoke trapping systems (cold traps, Cambridge filter pad)
12 DeBardeleben et al . (1991) nude no mention of the depth of insertion of the cigarette into the cigarette holder . It was eventually set at
I 1 nun (7/16 in) . This insertion depth ensured that in most products with perforated filter tipa, the perforations were not covered, i .e . .,
the perforations were external to the cigarette holder .
17
~ Analytical procedures
- water (Karl Fischer titration, gas chromatography)

- nicotine (silicotungstic acid method, spectrophotometric methods,
titration, gas chromatography) .
Table S summarizes information from Bradford et al . (1936), Wynder and Hoffmann

(1967), Johnson (1986), DeBardeleben et al., (1991), and others on the similarities and
differences in the smoking parameters used by various investigators or institutions in the
determination of cigarette MS "tar" and nicotine .
Table 6 compares the smoking and parameters and analytical procedures prescribed for
use by the cigarette manufacturers (Bates et al ., 1967, 1968), by the USDA (Ogg et al ., 1964),
and by the FTC (1967b).
18
(A
TABLE 5: SMOKING PARAMETERS PRESCRIBED FOR USE IN VARIOUS

DETERMINATIONS OF CIGARETTE MS "TAR" AND NICOTINE
Source
p~ Bradford CORESTA 24 PPl 3m 4Qe FM
puff volume, ml 35 35 t 0 .3' 35 33 35 3S t 0.5 35 t 0 .5
33 t 0 .25"
puff duration, .ec 2 .0 1 .8-2 .2 f 0 .0t3' 2 2 2 2 t 0.2 2 t 0 .2
2 .0 t 0.05b
puff fcequency, puff/min 1 1° 1 1 1 1' l

1°
bua lenyt6, mm 23 23 23 23 20 30 23
OW + 3• OW + 3• OW + 3' OW + 3a OW + 31 OW + 3'
F+81 F+Br F+Bt OW+Sh
air flow, mVaec 17 .5 17.5 17.3 17.5 17.5 17 .5 17 .3
aample aize, no . of ci8areaea 200 100
ia.eRion depth, mm 11 11
TPM trappinp tyatem CFI+i CFFi CF14 CFFi CFpi CFpi
SSPti BSFt ESpk
TPM water analyaia llC' Oct Oct Oct OC1 Oct

KFl• KEtm KFI° K1tN KFl° KF I°
TPM nicotine andyaia STAF" GC1 QC1 ClC! Od OCi ad

OSpo OSpo
laboratory conditions 22'C 22'C 22'C 22•C 23 .9'C 23 .9'C

60% RH 60% RH 60% RH 60% RH 60% RH 60% RH
ci8arette conditioning 22'C 22•C 22•C 22'C 24 hr @ 24 hr 0

60% RH 60% RH 60% Wi 60% RH 23 .9'C 23 .9'C
60% RH 60% RH
' ptrior w 1989 ` Atter 1989

° 1 puff every 60 t 1 aec ° 1 puff every 60 t 0 .5 aac
• OW - overanp ; 23 mm or overweap + 3 mn% whichever Ia longer
r F - flher ; 23 mm or Sher + 8 mm, whichever Is loag .r
e For cipralba s 75 nM 20 aom a oveewpp + 3 me% whichever ia lon8er
k For ci8aauea > 75 mm,10 mm ar ovenvap + 5 mm, whichever ia looSer
1 OW m overnc .pp 30 mm or aver.vrap + 3 mm, whichever ia lonèr
J CFP - Cambridje mter pad k BSP ~ electroatado precipitation
~ OC - gas cbromatojrapby ~ KFT ~ Karl Fiacber BtnBoo
e BTAp - ailioowo8 .dc aaW pencedur.
o OSP - OeitFith still procedure. 'lbis procedure was uaed for war yean In the U .S . but .vaa
replaced by a ps cbeom .w;eapbio met6od, wbsequeofly approved by the FTC
19
TABLE 6: COMPARISON OF SMOKING PARAMETERS PRESCRIBED FOR
USE BY THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY (BATES et al, (1967, 1968),
OGG et ot. (1964), AND THE FTC (1967b) IN THEIR
DETERMINATIONS OF CIGARETTE MS "TAR" AND NICOTINE
Source
Parameter Bslgs ti.el, 2u Fn

puff volume, ml 35 t 0.5 35 t 0 .5 35 f 0 .5
puff duration, sec 2 .0 t 0 .2 2 ± 0.2 2 ± 0 .2
puff frequency, number l per 60 ± 1 I per 60 ± l I
butt length, mm NP: 23, 30b, or 47 NF : 30 NF - 23

F- OW+3° F:OW+3° F- OW+3d
F+OW+3°
air flow, ml/sec 17 .5 17 .5 17 .5
sample size, no . of cigarettes 200' 200 100
ineertion depth, mm 11 11 1l
TPM trapping system CFFr CFFt CFFr
TPM water analysis Kb'1'e KFre K1TTe

GC6 ()Ci
TPM nicotine analysis GS>J GSFi GSPi

()Cb
laboratory conditions 23 .9 ± 1 .1°C 23 .9°C 23 .9°C

60 f 2%RH 60%RH 60%RH
cigarette conditioning variablet at 24 hr at 24 hr at

23 .9° ± 1 .1°C 23 .9°C 23 .9°C
60t2%R13 60%RH 60%RH
' NF - nonfiltered cigarette ; F - filtered cigarette

6 30 mm or overwrap + 3 nun was the preference of Bates er al (1967, 1968)
° OW - overwrap ; 30 mm or overwrap + 3 nun, whichever Is longer
d OW - overwrap ; 23 mm or ovenvrsp + 3 mm, whichever Is longer
• 40 determinationa on S cigarettes
r CFP - Cambridge filter pad
e KFT - Karl Fischer titration
b OC - gee chromatography ; the procedure of Schultz and Spears was recommended
~ Eventually a gas chromatographic procedure was implemented in the FTC procedure to
determine water and nicotine In the particulate matter
1 OSP - Griffith still procedure
k it was recommended that cigarettes be conditioned under laboratory conditions
specified until they "come to moisture equilibrium with the atmosphere of the
conditioning chamber ."
Both prior to and after the implementation in 1967 of the FTC analytical procedure for
cigarette MS "tar" and nicotine, numerous investigators reported on their determinations of total
particulate matter, water, nicotine, and "tar" in cigarette MS . References are indicated in Table
7. Surprisingly, most of the studies conducted pre-1967 dealt with methods of determining
20
TABLE 7: CHRONOLOGY OF ANALYSIS OF MS TPM AND NICOTINE AND
WATER IN MS TPM
tinatlon TPM Nicotine Determtnation TPM Water Determination
~.
Pre-193Q
~ ~ I{iaeling, 1882s, 1882b
\, Lowenthal, 1892
~ Schmidt, 1904
Theodorovita, 1905
~ Warburg, 1906
Biederbeek, .1908
\ Toth, 1908, 1909
Toth and Krampera, 1910
Van Leeuwen, 1919
Hahn and Langer, 1920

Bogner, 1921 _/n •
Popp,1922
Baumberger, 1923a, 1923b
Ptyl and Schmidt, 1927
Wenuach, 1928
Winter.tein and Aronaon, 1928
193Qs
Preiu, 1936 Bodnar, 1930s, 1930b
• Heiduachaka, 1930
Batu and Toole, 1931•, 1932a', 1932b'
Hahn and IfiriamaM, 1931
Kovalenko, 1931
Malaquin, 1931
Pydki, 1931a, 1931b, 1932 .
Wenusch, 1931a, 1931b
Heiduachaka and Poat, 1932
Molinati, 1932
Nagy, 1932a, 1932b
Hofmann, 1933°
Nagy and Dickmann, 1933a, 1933b
Pfyl, 1933a, 1933b
Pyriki, 1933, 1934, 1935
Schloumann, 1933
Toole, 1933
Kopericu, 1934
Pretu, 1934, 1935, 1936
Wenuach, 1934s, 1934b, 1934c, 1934d,
1934e, 1936a, 1936b, 1937a,
1937b
Wulfert, 1934a, 1934b
Bodnar et at ., 1935
Jensen and Haley, 1935
~
Hofmann, 1942b ~
Pyriki, 1943 ~--j
Griffith and Jefl'rey, 1948 ~'
Dabrowaka, 1949 S
tp
J
tp
21
Table 7. Continued:
TPM Nicotine Deterrnination TPM Water DeterminatioC

19SOs
Schmihl et at., 1954b Willita ct at., 1950 Cogbill et al ., 1959

Schmihl, 195Sb Marchand and Zenard, 1951 Fiahel, 1959
Schmihl and Schneider, 1955b Cundiff and Markunaa, 1953', 1955'
Keith and Newaome, 1956, 1957 Laurene and Harrell, 195Sb
Aksu and Fneroan S, 1958s, 1958b izawa and Kobashi, 1956
Morgareidge, 1958, 1959 lzawa et at ., 1956s, 1956b
Trifu and Dumitreacu, 1958s, 19S8b, Grittith, 1957d
1959 Aksu and Enercan S, 1958s, 1958b
Wartman and Harlow, 1958 Laurene and Harrell, 1958"
McConnell et at., 1959b, 1960P Mathur, 1958
Monod and DuPont, 1959 Trifu and Dumltreacu, 1958s, 1958b
Staberg, 1959 Wartman and Harlow, 1958
Wartman et at ., 1959 Kuhn, 1959b
Pleaaanta et al ., 1959b
Staberg, 1959
Waltz er al., 1959b
L2&
Bentley and Burgan, 1961 Barkemeyer and Seehofer, 1960b Crowell, 1960b
Bock et at., 1962 Ogg ct al ., 1960, 1962 Fishel, 1960
Ogg et at., 1962 Kuhn and Marek, 1961 Holmea and Cridlin, 1960
Harrell and Sullivan, 1963t Aamua et al ., 19626 Crowell et al ., 1961b
Smith and De Souza, 1963° Pyriki and Moldenhauer, 1962 Jarrell and Wickham, 1961°, 1962°
1964 biopm (fatnn/'r Reporr Artho and Grob, 1963, 1964d Ogg et al ., 1962
Ogg, 1964 Harrell and Sullivan, 19631 Harrell and Sullivam, 1963r
Okada and Shibayama, 1964b Seehofer and Borowaki, 1963a Waltz et al., 1963b
Senkus, 1960 !%{ SSageaai (ienerol'c Report 1964 b5ogoow Gsewertil'c Reporr
TTokura and Furakawa, 1964 Mann et al., 1964° Neurath et al ., 1964
Rodgman, 196Sa, 196Sb, 1965c Ogg, 1964 Okada and Shibayama, 1964s, 1964b
Yamazaki tt at ., 1965 Senkua, 1964t Sloan and Sublett, 1964°, 1965°
CORESTA, 1966a Tokura and Funkawa, 1964 Neuath, 1966
Batea et at., 1967, 1968 Lyerly, 1965a°, 1965b° Neurath er al., 1966
MOller and Moldenhauer, 1967 Pyrikl and Moldenhauer, 1965a, 1963b° Schultz and Spears, 1966°
Wynder and Hoffmann, 1967r Rodgnun, 1965s . 1965b, 1965c Thome, 196Sa°, 1965b°, 1966°
Dalhamn, 1968 Verband,1963 Bates et al., 1967, 1968
CORESTA, 1969a Yamazaki et al., 1965 Graves, 1967°
Georgiev, 1969 Lyerly and Gilleland, 1966 Wynder and Hoffaunn, 1967r
Gilea, 1969t CORESTA, 1966b, 1966c, 1966d CORESTA, 1969a
Gilea and Sullivan, 1969 Harvey et al., 1966' , 1967'
Ogg, 1969 Bates et al ., 1967, 1968
Viart, 1969 Lyerly 1967°
M811er and Molden6auer, 1967
Wynder and Hoffmann, 1967t
Dalhamn, 1968
Charles et al ., 1969b
Pillsbury et at., 1969
CORESTA, 1969b
Georgiev, 1969
Gilea, 1969r
Gilea and Sullivan, 1969
Ogg, 1969
22
TPM Determination TPM Nicntine Determination TPM Water Detennination

1970s
Ogg and Schulz, 1970 Cano et al., 1970° Watson et al., 1970°
Smit, 1972b Ogg and Schulz, 1970 Hartung and Stewart, 1973
Hartung and Stewart, 1973 Sadler et al., 19704 Roberta, 1975°
Norman, 1973, 1974 Diffee and Sheppard, 1971° Rix, 1979
Rothwell and Grant, 1974t Bourlas and F.aperdy, 1972b
Harbin and Stamey, 1975 Hartung and Stewart, 1973
Williamson et al., 1975 Schulz and Seehofer, 1973
Bronnemann et al ., 1976r Randolph, 1973°, 1974°
Hammond et al., 1976 Rothwell and Orant, 1970
Keith, 1976 Wagner and Thaggard, 1974°, 1979°
Owen, 1976 Diffee, 1975
Wakeham, 1976 Roberts, 1975°
Burton et al., 1977 Williamson et al ., 1975
Maeda et al ., 1978 Bourlas et al ., 19766
Rix, 1979 DeVriea et al ., 1976"
Bmnnemann et al ., 1976"
Hammond et al ., 1976
Keith, 1976
Leonetti and Carugno, 1976°
Lyerly and Greene, 1976°
Owen, 1976
Wakeham, 1976
Campbell, 1978
Oaivoromchi et al., 1978°
Maeda et al., 1978
Ma.kninec et al ., 1978a
Rix, 1979
1980.r
Hege, 1980b Shoffner and Ireland, 1980°, 1982° CORESTA, 1987°, 1989b°, 1990'
Norman et al., 1980a, 1980b McMuttrie et at., 1981 ISO, 1987a, 1987b
Thomaa, 1980b Wald et al ., 1981
Herning et al ., 1981 Yamamoto, 1981
McMurtrie et al., 1981 Baskevitch and Ferrer, 1982
Sloan and Curran, 1981b Dobbins, 1984
Wald et al ., 1981 Yamamoto et al ., 1984
Yama111100, 1981 CORESTA, 1986°, 1989b°
Baakevitch and Ferrer, 1982 ISO, 1989a°, 1989bb
Dobbina, 1984
Yamamoto et al., 1984
ISO, 1986
Johtuon,1986t
Williamson et al., 1986s, 1986b
ISO, 1987s, 1987b
CORESTA, 1989a, 1989b
•
23
TPM Determination TPM Nicotine Determination TPM Water Determination
1M
Yamamoto et al ., 1990 Ayres et at ., 1990b Deldardeleben et al ., 1991t
DeBardeleben et al., 1991t Yamamoto et al., 1990
DeBardeleben et al., 1991t
Deutach and RobeR.on, 1991°
Deutech and Jefton, 1994°
• Titrimetric method b Spectrophotometic method °(3aa chromatognphic method

d Distillation method ° Extraction method t Review
a High pressure liquid chromatograph
nicotine or total alkaloids in cigarette MS . Those described post-1967 include improved

procedures (e .g., gas chromatographic methods instead of gravimetric, titrimetric, or
spectrophotometric procedures for nicotine ; gas chromatographic methods instead of the Karl
Fischer titrimetric method for water), spectrophotometric methods for determination of "tar"
in the MS from ultralow-"tar" cigarette, automation of existing procedures, reviews, and the
like.
VI . HISTORICAL TRENDS
1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984

A. Sales-Weighted 50 3 .0
Average MS "Tar" 45
Deliveries 1711.r Tlpe
40 Raoonaututad Tobacco Sbaat
Papar Addithes
Papar Porodty
From the mid-1950s 35 i:panded Tobaaoo
through the late 1980s, the sales- V.atllatlon
30
weighted average "tar" yield of
U.S. cigarettes has declined as 25
~ . . . . . .... . . . .
shown in Figure 4 .
15 ~ • . .. ..~
This decline in "tar" yield
is the result of inclusion of various 10 - Tar
combinations of these technologies 5
to varying degrees in the design of
0I I I I I L_ I I I 0.0
cigarette. As noted previously, 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
these technologies include :
Figure 4. "Tar" and Nicotine Deliveries, Sales Weighted Average
Basis
• tobacco blend and weight
• tobacco rod length and
circumference
• filter tips (material type and additives)
24
• processed tobaccos (reconstituted tobacco sheet, expanded tobacco)
• air dilution (increased paper porosity, filter tip perforations) .
In Figure 4 are indicated the approximate dates when these technologies were introduced
and subsequently became used routinely thoughout by U .S . cigarette manufacturers .
It has been noted by the U .S . Surgeon General (USPHS, 1979, 1981, 1982) that the
following changes in the properties of the "tar", actually CSC, accompanied the decrease in
sales-weighted average "tar" produced by inclusion of the various technlogies in cigarette
design:
• The BaP per mg of CSC decreased over the same time period .
• The tumorigenicity, as measured in mouse-skin painting studies, of the MS "tar" (CSC)

decreased over the same time period .
B . Sales-Weighted Average MS Nicotine Deliveries
From the mid-1950s through the late 1980s, the sales-weighted average nicotine yield of
U. S. cigarettes has declined as shown in Figure 4 .
This decline in per cigarette nicotine yield is also the result of inclusion of the various
technologies to varying degrees in the cigarette design .
VII. EFFECT OF VARIATION OF MAJOR SMOKING PARAMETERS ON FTC MS

"TAR" AND NICOTINE YIELDS
An individual cigarette smoker generally does not consume his/her cigarette by the major
smoking parameters (puff volume = 35 ml, puff duration = 2 sec, puff frequency = 1 puff/60
sec) defined for use in the FTC smoking procedure . Data are available from several RJRT in-
house studies to show the effect on MS cigarette "tar" and nicotine yields of keeping two of the
three parameters constant and varying the third .
In 1979, Rix (1979), using Response Surface Methodology, conducted a detailed study
on the effect of puff volume, duration, and frequency on puff number plus the MS TPM, MS
nicotine, MS water, MS "tar," and MS carbon monoxide yields from 85-mm Winston and
Marlboro cigarettes . Table 8 summarizes the 'tar" and nicotine data on the 85-mm Winston .
"Tar" and nicotine yields are increased by increasing the puff frequency and by increasing the
puff volume. Examination of the data in Table 8 reveals that of the three major parameters
changes in the puff duration have the least effect on MS "tar" and nicotine yields: See
comparisons of Sample No . 17 vs Sample No . 18 and Sample No . 1 vs Sample No. 3 where the
puff durations of 1 .5 vs 2 .5 sec were studied .
TABLE 8: THE EFFECT OF VARIATION IN SMOKING PARAMETERS (PUFF VOLUME,
DURATION, FREQUENCY) ON THE FTC "TAR" AND NICOTINE YIELDS
FROM AN 85-mm W7W!nN
Puff Puff Puff FTC FfC No . of
Samole No. Volume, ml Duration, sec Freauencv "Tar" . ma tlicotine . ma rt
16 35 1 .5 30 42 .1 2 .26 15 .2
1 3S 1 .3 60 23 .7 1 .60 9 .3
16 35 1 .5 30 42 .1 2 .26 15 .2
17 60 1 .5 30 62 .2 2.85 12 .2
2 3S 2 .S 30 38 .7 2 .31 13 .5
18 60 2 .S 30 61 .1 2 .72 11 .4
3 3S 2 .S 60 24 .1 1 .43 9.1
20 60 2 .5 60 41 .8 1 .96 8.4
11 47.5 2 .0 30 43 .9 2 .21 10 .8
S/l0° 47 .5 2.0 45 40 .7 2 .11 10 .3
47 .5 2 .0 60 32 .4 1 .81 8 .2
13 26 .3 2 .0 43 24 .0 1 .48 12 .5
S/lOb 47 .5 2 .0 45 40 .7 2.11 10.3
14 68 .8 2 .0 4S 50 .7 2 .31 9 .1
2 35 2 .5 30 38 .7 2 .31 13 .5
© 35 2 .S 60 24 .1 1 .43 9 .1
18 2 .S 30 61 .1 2 .72 11 .4
20 2 .S 60 41 .8 1 .96 8.4
17 60 1 .5 30 62 .2 2 .85 12 .2 cn
N
18 60 2 .5 30 61 .1 2 .72 11 .4 J
N
m
~
OD
26 W
l 35 1 .5 60 23 .7 1 .60 9 .3
3 35 2 .5 60 24,1 1 .43 9 .1
' Data are from Rix (1979) who also presented similar data for the 85-mm Marlboro . Rix also presented data on the
yields of TPM, TPM water, and carbon monoxide .
b Data represent the average "tar^ and nicotine yields from Samples Noa . 5 through 10.
Rix (1979) also compared the effect on the carbon monoxide, nicotine, and "tar" yields
from the 85-mm Winston and 85-mm Marlboro of changing the major FTC smoking parameters
(35-m1 puff volume, 2 .0-sec puff duration, 60-sec puff frequency) to more "realistic""
smoldng conditions (65-m1 volume, 2 .0-sec duration, 45-sec frequency) . Table 9 summarizes
the results obtained . At the higher puff volume and frequency, the % differences between the
Winston and the Marlboro become less for MS "tar" and nicotine yields, with the Winston yield
being the higher . In the 150-page report by Rix, there are numerous plots of the relationships
between carbon monoxide, nicotine, and "tar" yields and puff volume, duration, and frequency
for the 85-mm Winston and Marlboro . Also included are plots (2-sec puff duration, 1 puff/min)
of the "tar"/nicotine ratios vs puff volume for the following brands : Winston, Camel, Vantage,
Now, More, Real, and Marlboro .
TABLE 9 : 85-mm WJVSTiDN AND MARl.8OR0: COMPARISON OF FTC CARBON

MONOXIDE, NICOTINE, AND `-TAR" YIELDS AT STANDARD AND MORE
"REALISTIC" SMOKIING PARAMETERS
FTC "Tar", FTC Nicotine, FTC CO, "Tar"/Nicotine
cjgg agg ale/ciat me/ciet m !Q Ciat Rado
FTC smokfng condidons (3J-ml pkQ', 2.0-sec puff durotion, one pi}D'every 60 see)
WAsron 20.6 (20.9)' 1 .43 (24 .3) 19 .1 (15 .2) 14.4 (-4.8)
Marlboro 16 .3 1 .08 16 .2 15 .1
' ReallsNe" snaokIng eondidons (6J-rnd pqf. 2.4see pr}Q'durotion, one pr{Q'every 45 sec)
Wlnsron 35 .7 (15 .7) 2 .35 (16 .8) 33 .9 (15 .3) 13 .2 (-2 .6)
Marlboro 30.1 1 .93 28 .7 15 .6
' Numbers in parentheses represent % difference between WINSTON and MARLBORO :
% Difference - 100(Wtnsron - Marfboro)l Wlnrton
In a similar study on the 100-mm Winston and the now defunct 120-mm Dawn, Dobbins
(1984) elected to vary the puff volumes at different puff frequencies with the puff duration
• 13 Whether the "realistic" conditions for 1979 smokers would apply to current (1994) smokers is not known . Two years later, Henning et
at. (1981) observed that filter cigarette smokers took a 35 .9- to 47 .8-m1 puff of 1 .94 to 2 .06 wc every 26.9 to 30 .0 sec .
27
• maintained throughout at 2 .0 sec because of the findings of Rix (1979) on the minimal effect of
variation in puff duration . His data on number of puffs plus MS "tar," and MS nicotine yields
are summarized in Table 10 . In addition to the data summarized, Dobbins also reported the MS
TPM and TPM water yields for the cigarettes . The effects of variation of puff volume (puff
duration and puff frequency constant) and puff frequency (puff volume and puff duration
constant) observed for the 100-mm Winston and the 120-mm Dawn were similar to those
reported by Rix for 85-mm Winston and 85-mm Marlboro .
Herning et al.
Sm4king Parameter Rix (1979) Dobbins (1984) (1981)
,
cigarette type 85-mm filtered cigarettes 100-mm and 120-mm smokers of filtered
filtered cigarettes cigarettes
puff volume, ml 26 .3, 35 .0, 37 .5, 15, 25, 35, 40, 45, 55 35 .9-47 .8
60.0,68 .8
puff duration, seo 1 .15, 1 .5, 1 .0, 2.5, 2 .85 2.0 1 .94-2.06
puff frequency, sec 30, 45, 60 30, 45, 60 26 .9-30 .0
28
TABLE 10: THE EFFECT OF VARIATION IN SMOKING PARAMETERS (PUFF VOLUME,
FREQUENCY) ON THE FT C "TAR" AND NI COTINE YIELDS FROM A 100-mm
W11VSTrIN
Puff Puff Puff RCC FTC
Volume. ml fluration. aeo Freauencv "Tar" . me Nicotine, mQ No . of Puffi
15 2 .0 30 13 .5 1 .08 20.7
1S 2 .0 45 10 .0 0 .81 15 .2
15 2.0 60 7 .8 0 .63 12 .0
2 .0 30 23 .2 1 .77 18 .4
25 2 .0 45 17 .4 1 .19 13 .5
2 .0 60 13 .8 1 .02 11 .1
35 2 .0 30 30.6 2 .24 16,6
35 2 .0 45 23 .0 1 .72 12 .6
35 2 .0 60 18 .6 1 .36 10.5
1 40 2.0 30 32 .0 2.32 16 .0
45 2 .0 30 34 .6 2 .44 15 .8
45 2 .0 45 25 .9 1 .89 12.2
45 2 .0 60 21 .3 1 .52 10 .1
SS 2 .0 30 38 .0 2 .68 14.2
SS 2 .0 45 31 .4 2 .09 11 .4
55 2 .0 60 24 .1 1 .62 9 .4
' Data from Dobbina (1984)
29
VIII. RELATIONSHIP TO HUMAN SMOKING
USPHS, 1979 :
The "tar" and nicotine content of cigarettes is measured by machines which smoke cigarettes
according to a predetermined puff rate, butt length, duration of puff, and volume of puff . An
individual smoker does not necessarily consume cigarette in this standardized manner .
Depending on the makeup of the cigarette, the wet particulate matter that issues with the [MS]
from the butt end amounts to 0 .2 to 9 .0 percent of the weight of the [MS] . The. ..FTC issues
reports semiannually on the "tar" content of all U .S . commercial cigarettes . In those reports
"tar" is defined as total particulate of [MS], minus water and nicotine, and is determined by
smoking cigarettes under standard conditions in a 20-channel machine [Pillsbury et al ., 1969] .
[From 1955 to 1977], the "tar" and nicotine contents' of cigarettes have declined . This trend is
illustrated in [F'igure 5] which depicts the sales-weighted average "tar" delivery per cigarette
from 1955 to 197T. . . For the years after 1967, periodic measurements of cigarette "tar" by the
[FTC, 1967b] permit reliable calculations of sales-weighted average "tar" delivery .
From 1954, sales-weighted average "tar" decreased from approximately 37 mg to approximately

23 mg . Although this change paralleled the rapid increase in filtertip market share, it also reflected
a decrease in the "tar" content of both filtertip and nonfilter cigarettes . . . Since 1966,the sales-
weighted average "tar" has continued to decrease . . . The observed decreases in sales-weighted
• "tar" have been paralleled by declines in the sales-weighted nicotine [yield] per cigarette .
a A cigarette does not have a"tu" content; Its MS does.

b FiQnre S is in an extension of that ahown In the 1979 Surgeon General's report (USPHS, 1979) ;
it represents data from 1954 through 1985 .
USPHS, 1981 :
There is evidence that machines that measure "tar" and nicotine content are not suitable for
measurements of smoke from lower "tar" and nicotine cigarettes with perforated filter tips . . .and
that the "tar" and nicotine in the inhaled smoke may be more than indicated by the test
procedures .
The FTC ratings of "tar" and nicotine yields measure an implied risk to the smoker . Smoking-
maehine"data guide experimenters in elucidating the mechanisms of induction of smoking-related
disease . Absolute levels of smoke constituents my be very important for experiments, so the
experimenter must have reliable information about the comparability of machine and human
smoking . The use of machine data to monitor risk has somewhat different requirements . If the
relative yields of different cigarettes are not greatly affected by smoking conditions, present
smoking-machine standards will be adequate to indicate relative risk of new cigarettes . We know,
however, that the relative yield of many constituents is affected by butt length, puff frequency,
and degree of ventilation . We need to determine how the variations in these smoking parameters
affect relative yields of the several substances in smoke that are of toxicological interest .
Methods for determining "tar"' and nicotine yield were developed before very low yield
cigarettes were an important segment of the market . It is questionable whether existing procedures
can measure accurately the "tar" delivery of the cigarettes yielding 0 .1 mg of "tar." Other
techniques giving acceptable results must be developed . Procedures for determining "tar" yields
30
• of low magnitude through measurement of fluorescence have been recommended (Thomas, 1980) .
[see Appendix C, this memorandum]
USPHS, 1982 :
The composition of the [MS] and [SS] depends greatly on the smoking conditions and the methods
of collection and analysis . This has long been realized; more than 20 years ago, standardized
smoking conditions were established for machine measurements of cigarette smoke [Wartman et
al., 1959] . Since then, the . . .FfC, research institutions, and the U .S . cigarette industry have used
the same standardized parameters for cigarette smoking [Bates et al ., 1968 ; Pillsbury et al .,
1969] . . . The standard cigarette smoking conditions reflect the average smoking habits of a male
smoker of nonfilter cigarettes as determined 25 years ago (Brunnemann et al ., 1976] . The average
smoking parameters recently recorded for filter cigarette smokers were one puff of 1 .94 to 2 .06
seconds duration, repeated every 26 .9 to 30 .0 seconds, with a puff volume of 35 .9 to 47 .8 ml
[Herning et al., 1981] . Nevertheless, FTC-standard cigarette smoking conditions continue to be
used for comparisons of tar and nicotine yields in the smoke of present cigarettes and those made
years and even decades ago .
1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
The trends for the 50 3 .0
sales-weighted average
tar and nicotine 45
171ta Ttpr
deliveries of U .S . 2 .5 °•!
40 R4ooo.ttlut.a ToDaooo Sh ..t
cigarettes since 1955 . . . ~ Pap .r Addlu...
Pap.r PoroalLy
are shown in [Figure ~ 35 lspaadad Tobaoao
~ v.nw.u.o 2 .0
5] . . . During this time,
the percentage of filter- 30
~
tipped cigarettes in 25
U .S . cigarette
production increased S5 20
from 18 .7 to 90 a
15 ~'`~ ...
percent . . .
- Tar
The reported data are
based on measurements 5
obtained by machine 0 I 1 1 I 0 .0
1 I I
smoking of cigarettes 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
under standard Figure S . "Tar" and Nicotine Deliveries, Sales Weighted Average
conditions . As Basis
discussed before, these
conditions may have
reflected the average smoking habits of individuals 25 years ago, but today [1982] they appear to be
representative of less than 10 percent of U .S . smokers .
Despite the repeated criticisms and deficiencies noted above (USPHS, 1979, 1981, 1982)
of the FTC analytical procedure for "tar" and nicotine yields, a procedure imposed on the U .S .
cigarette manufacturers (FTC, 1966, 1967), no serious attempt has been made by the FTC
during the past decade to modify the analytical procedure it put in place in 1967 . Because of a
B&W uniquely filtered cigarette product that behaved differently when smoked in the holder on
•
31
the FTC-recommended smoking machine and when smoked by mouth", an attempt was made
to introduce a new holder that would circumvent the problem . The original rubber diaphragm
holder on the FTC smoking machine is still in use.
IX. PERTINENT EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA : DO PEOPLE WHO SMOKE

REDUCED-"TAR" CIGARETTF.S HAVE A LOWER INCIDENCE OF
SMOKING-RELATED DISEASE?
In 1976, Hammond et al. (1976) described the decrease in mortality ratios in low-
nicotine, low-"tar" smokers compared to high-nicotine, high-"tar" smokers for lung cancer .
Several years later, Hammond (1980) wrote :
Wynder and I drafted a resolution that . . .was quoted in the Congressional Record [U .S . Congress,
1967] and by the Surgeon General . It said, "The preponderance of the scientific evidence strongly
suggests that the lower the 'tar' and nicotine contenN [sic] in cigarettes, the less harmful would
be the effects . . . The statement has been relevant ever since . Today I would change this wording .
Instead of saying that "the preponderance of evidence strongly suggests," I'd now say "the
preponderance of scientific evidence very strongly suggests" and I'd leave the rest of the wording
unchanged .
' A cigarette does not have a"ur content" ; its MS does .
In a comparison of the cellular changes (hyperplasia, metaplasia, carcinoma-in-situ) found

in the respiratory tract of smokers who died from lung cancer during the periods 1955-1960 and
1970-1977, Auerbach et al . (1979, 1980) reported that the epidemiological data reported by
Hammond et al. (1976) were paralleled by pathological data . They reported :
Although we do not have the tar and nicotine content [sic] of the cigarettes smoked by the subjects
in this study, all those who died in the 1955-1960 period had to have smoked cigarettes up to the
time of their death that were higher in tar and nicotine, than those who died during the years
1970-1977 . . . [F]or the last 5-10 years of their lives none of the 1970-1977 group could have
smoked cigarettes with as high a tar and nicotine content [sic] as those smoked by the 1955-1960
group .
Whenever we have found an early microscopic invasion in the tracheobronchial tree

epithelium in our previous studies of lung cancer cases, it was always next to and probably arose
from an area of carcinoma-in-situ . The changes in the cigarette over the 15 years from the time
the average group A person died [the 1955-1960 group] to the time the group B people died [the
1970-1977 group] has resulted in the changes demonstrated. . . These changes seem to be the result
of decreased tar and nicotine and they correlate with epidemiological data already presented . . .
With regard to reduced-"tar" cigarettes, Wynder (1980) noted :
A number of retrospective epidemiological studies have shown a decreased risk of disease

associated with filtered cigarette smoking . . . In our studies we calculated risk among persons who
smoked filtered cigarettes . . . [T]he risk of developing either epidermoid lung cancer or larynx
• 1s Mouth smoking of the cigarette generated much higher "tar" yields than when the cigarette was smoked In the FfC smoking
machine because of compression by the smoker's lips of longiwdinal dou In the filter tip .
32
cancer is reduced up to 33 % in long-term (Z 10 yr) smokers of filtered cigarettes, compared to
smokers of nonfiltered cigarettes.
The retrospective study from our group included more than 1000 cases of lung and larynx cancer
and showed a reduction in risks among long-term filter cigarette smokers of 10 years or more of
between 25 % and 33 % for both men and womea . . . This finding has been confirmed by the
prospective studies of the American Cancer Society . . . ([¢1 discussion to Russell (1980a)]
~
~
_j
~
m
OD
~
m
33
ITEM TO BE INSERTED :
In 1964, nicotine was essentially given a clean bill of health in the first Surgeon
General's report on smoking and health (USPHS, 1964) . Fifteen years later, nicotine was not
described in overly adverse terms. E.g., in the 1979 Surgeon General's report it was stated :
For the habitual smoker, the smoking of a cigarette is a rewarding experience ... Because of the
myriad compounds present in cigarette smoke, it should be kept in mind that the pharmacological
effects of smoking are not related solely to nicotine ; rather, it is the combined effect of the whole
smoke . Nevertheless, nicotine is generally accepted as the principal constituent responsible for
cigarette smokers' pharmacologic response. . .
Because "tar" rather than nicotine was considered to be the most hazardous part of the
particulate phase of MS, there was an era when it was proposed to fabricate a "less hazardous"
by redesigning it to deliver a substantially reduced "tar" level but deliver the same or an only
slightly reduced nicotine level, i .e., decrease the "tar" :nicotine ratio (Russell et al., 1973,
Russell, 1976, 1980b ; Schacter, 1978) . Russell et al. (1973) noted :
[T]he least harmful cigarettes for heavy smokers may be those with high, rather than low, nicotine
yield. . .
[A] cigarette with a high nicotine yield would enable heavy smokers to curb their tobacco
consumption, and harmfulness would be further reduced if, at the same time, the tar and CO
yields were low . . . To reduce tar yield without lowering the nicotine yield presents a challenge to
cigarette technology but is one which the skill and resources available are no doubt capable of
meeting . . .
and Russell (1980) in a conference on "safer cigarette" design wrote :
[A] low-tar, low-CO, but medium-, rather than low-, nicotine cigarette might reduce tar and CO
intake more than occurs with low-tar, low-CO, low-nicotine cigarettes . It might also be more
acceptable to smokers .
A problem with this concept was consumer acceptance when "tar" :nicotine ratio was less than about 7 . The
consumer re " from inhaling because of the harshness of the MS . Perforated filter-tip
cigarettes with" 1" :nicotine ratios between 9 and 11 or other filtered and nonfiltered cigarettes
with "tar" :ni e ratios above 10 are not perceived as too harsh to smoke's .
1s The following ia my recollection of In-house experiments conducted by Harris with a modified NOW with 2-mg "tar" delivery : Its
nicotine delivery was enhanced by nicotine ask addition to the blend so that'4ar" :nicotine ratio was decreased from about 9 to about 3 .
• Even though the MS nicotine delivery per cigarette was about 0 .6 mg and the MS nicotine delivery per puff was only about 0 .1 mg,
panelists repotted the modified cigarette to be totally unacceptable because of the harshness of the smoke . Cigarettes with deliveries of
18 mg "tar" and 1 .5 mg nicotine (a "tar" :nicot'ux ratio of 12 and a per puff nicotine delivery of about 0 .1S mg) are rated acceptable .
34
APPENDIX A : HISTORICAL COMMENTS ON THE POSSIBLE HEALTH
ASPECTS OF POORLY DEFINED "TARS" OBTAINED
FROM TOBACCO BY A VARIETY OF METHODS
Prior to the first production of carcinoma in laboratory animals skin-painted with the tar
from cigarettes smoked under conditions supposedly simulating human smoking (Wynder et al .,
1953a, 1953b), there were various comments and studies described in the literature on changes
produced in laboratory animals by application of various tobacco products (tars, juices, extracts)
and the possible relationship of tobacco smoke tars to respiratory tract cancer . No malignant
tumors were produced in studies with tobacco tars or any other industrial tars such as coal tar
prior to 1915 when Yamagiwa and Ichikawa (1915, 1918, ef . summary 1965) developed the
procedure to produce tumors in laboratory animals skin-painted with coal tar solutions . Between
1915 and 1953, numerous studies were described of attempts to produce tumors with v' t~tS e~S
tobacco products . None of the tobacco products (tars, extracts, etc .) in a smoking
process simulating the human smoking of cigarettes . Table APP A-1 summarizes representative
tobacco product studies conducted between 1880 and 1953 and their results .
TABLE APP A-i : MISCELLANEOUS TOBACCO TAR STUDIES PRIOR TO

WYNDER et al. (1953a, 1953b, 1955)
Year Event
1880 Tillmanns (1880) suggested that tobacco amoke particulate matter was of interest in cancer research from an etiological
standpoint because it possibly contained the aenx products of incomplete combustion as In coal tar and aoot .
1900 Broach (1900) observed cellular proliferation in guineas pigs painted with "tobacco juice ."
1911 Wacker and Schminke (1911) iqjected tobacco tar from pipes into rabbits and reported cellular proliferation .
1915,1918 Yamaglwa and Ichikawa (1915, 1918) produced carcinoma in robbta by repeatedly painting their sMn wlth a solution
ojeoaf tar. 7hts was the first nporred tneident ojthe production ojearetnoma In laboratory animals and was the basLs
for the all the research on chemical tumorigenesls In subsequent years .
1923 Hoffman et al. (1923) reported that tobacco tar which was not nicotinatree produced strong acute toxic aymptoma
when painted on mouse akin .
1928 Helwlg (1928) reported that rabbits injected with tobacco tar from pipes developed extensive cellular proliferation ;
mice akin-painted with the same solution developed ulceration at painting site .
1930, 1931 Roffo (1930, 1931) painted 30 rabbits with a tobacco tar, one rabbit developed a tumor . Roffo claimed that this was
the first production of cancer In a laboratory animals with a tobacco tar . However, his tobacco tar was obtained by
destructive distillation of tobacco, not In a smoking process (cf. Wynder st al., 1953 ; Wynder and Hoffmann, 1964,
1967) .
1932 Bogen and Loomis (1932) concluded that tobacco tar did not possess the necessary irritating or stimulating properties
to induce cancerous growths when painted on mouse skin .
Cooper et al . (1932) collected tobacco tars from tobacco mechanically smoked at 400-500°C and at 700-800°C and
applied the tars as 10-50% aolutiona in benzene, ethanol, or glycerol . Only one tumor-bearing animals was observed .
He concluded that tobacco was relatively unimpoetant In cancer causation, especially when the data were compared
with those obtained with aimila coal tar solutions.
1935 Schurch and Winteratein (1935) reported that mice treated with cigar tobacco tar or cigar tobacco tar fractions did not fLn ,
develop cancer either treated with the tar or tar fractions alone or subjected to a combination of tar treatment plus v
irritation (thermal or mechanical) . ~
_ G
1P
tb
tO
N
35
Table 1 (Appeadibt A) . Continued:
1937 Taki (1937) reported a squamous cell tumor on the skin of mice treated with a tar extracted from tobacco pipes .
1946 Jaffe et al . (1946) questioned the validity of Roffo's results because of the fact he had used a destructive distillate of
tobacco rather than a tobacco tar generated by a smoking process .
1949 National Cancer Conference panel (American Cancer Society, 1949) reported that the tobacco smoke tar painted on the
skin of Strain A mice, injected subcutaneously, or itoected intravenously did not induce tumon of the lung (adenomas)
or any other organ .
1953 Shotadze (1953) treated mice (lower lip) with a tobacco pyrolyate for 1 l months . No precancerous or cancerous
conditions were observed .
1953, 1955 Wynder er al. (1953a, 1953b, 1955) rreported the production of carcinoma In laboratory animals (highly tusceptible
mouse strain) painted with massive doses of cigarette smoke condensate generated under conditions simulating human
smoking conditions .
• The Strain A mouse is extremely susceptible to development of lung adenoma; 90% of them will die with adenoma
of the lung .
•
36
APPENDIX B: INFORMATION PROVIDED RJRT MANAGEMENT IN THE
MID-1960s FOR COMMUNICATION TO THE FEDERAL
TRADE COMMISSION re ITS CIGARETTE MS "TAR"
AND NICOTINE LABELING PROPOSAL
Below is presented the essentials of a 1965 memorandum prepared for RJRT management
by Rodgman (1965c) . It incorporates information from memoranda by Senkus (1964) and
Rodgman (1965b) and a draft memorandum by Rodgman (see also 1965c) .
A Short Explanation and Analysis of Methods for Measuring "Tar and Nicotine"
in Cigatette Smoke fJan/Feb . 19651
Introduction
Suggestions have been made from time to time that cigarette packages should indicate the
amount of "tar and nicotine" produced by smoking of the cigarettes in the package . Even if it
were established that "tar and nicotine" have some relationship to health, there is no method by
which a smoker can be accurately informed of either the amount or the composition of the "tar
and nicotine" he receives from the cigarette he smokes .
The term "tar and nicotine" requires clarification . Cigarette smoke consists of the particulate
phase and the gas phase. The particulate phase has been referred to in scientific and other
literature by a variety of terms, such as tars, smoke solids, solids, total solids, particulate matter,
total particulate matter, smoke condensate, total smoke condensate, and smoke condensables . One
of the components of smoke solids is nicotine ; the nicotine fraction of smoke solids is sometimes
referred to as alkaloids, or total alkaloids . It seems more meaningful to use the term "total solids"
instead of "tar," and such term will be used in this memorandum .
Summary and Conclusions
Various methods exist for determining in the laboratory the total solids and nicotine in the
smoke from cigarettes smoked by a machine under laboratory conditions. Although the different
methods produce different results, one method could be arbitrarily selected as the standard . But
the total solids and nicotine received by any individual smoker would vary from that produced by
the smoking machine in the laboratory using the same brand of cigarettes, even if it were assumed
that the cigarettes smoked by the individual and those smoked in the laboratory are exactly alike .
This is because the smoking habits of individual vary, and because the conditions under which
cigarettes are smoked vary .
It may not be assumed, however, that cigarettes smoked by the smoking machine in the
laboratory are the same as the cigarettes of the same brand purchased by the smoker . Because of
unavoidable variations in the manufacture and storage of cigarettes, differences exist in the
tobacco, paper, filter, and condition of cigarettes so that measurements of total solids and nicotine
in the smoke of one sample of cigarettes will differ from measurements obtained with another
sample of the same brand, assuming that all possible steps are taken to assure as much uniformity
as possible . The measurements appearing on a package of cigarettes would relate to the cigarettes
used in the test and would not be accurate as applied to the cigarettes contained in the package .
• Even if two cigarettes of the same brand, or of two different brands, were to deliver precisely
37
the same amount of total solids, variations in the cigarettes, in smoking habits, and in smoking
conditions would generate total solids in the smoke of one of the cigarettes composed of different
quantities and kinds of chemical compounds from those found in the total solids from the other
cigarette . Since it is not known which, if any, chemical compound in the total solids is harmful,
it is not helpful to the smoker to furnish him a quantitative measurement of total solids, especially
one which, as has been stated in the two preceding paragraphs, cannot be accurate .
The conclusion is therefore inescapable that labeling the amount of "tar and nicotine" on a
cigarette package cannot give to the smoker meaningful information as to the amount or
composition of the total solids and nicotine he receives from the cigarettes he smokes . He is more
likely to be misled than informed .
Methods for Measuring Total Solids and Nicotine
The following five methods for measuring total solids and nicotine are described in Table
APP B-1 :
(1) The Wolman method [Wolman, 1953]

(2) The Consumer Union's method - No . 1[Consumer Reports, 1955]
(3) The Cambridge filter method (Wartman et al., 1959]
(4) The Foster D . Snell method' [Kimball]
(5) The Liggett and Myers Tobacco Company method [Keith and Newsome,
1956, 1957, 1958; Newsome and Keith, 1956, 1957] .
• It should be recognized that a number of variations of such methods are possible, and there may
be other methods . Those described [below], however, appear to be the ones most commonly
reported.
The five methods described in Table APP B-1 have not been compared on the same lot of
cigarettes . Three of the methods, however, have been compared by Keith and Newsome (1957a,
1957b, 1968) . The results of such comparison show distinct variations and were reported to be
as follows:
Consumer Union' .
Method - No . I Foeter D. Snell Method L.dcM Tobacco Co . Method
Solids, rtg/ciyt 18 .8 34.2 19.1
Nicotine, nglclat 2 .2 2 .9 3 .S
It is of course clear even apart from such comparisons that the various methods described in Table
APP 13-1 necessarily will produce different results because they do no start with the same smoking
conditions .
Generally speaking each of the methods require five to ten cigarettes for testing purposes . The
cigarettes are smoked by machine, which is designed to retain 100% of the particulate phase of
the smoke . Each method proceeds on the basis of smoking the cigarette using a fixed volume of
puff, a puff of specific duration,a fixed frequency of puffing, and a specific amount of the
cigarette to be smoked . All methods other than that of Liggett & Myers use a 35-m1 volume puff .
The most common duration of puff is two seconds, and the most common frequency of puff is one Ln
~
~
~
~P
~ The Foster D. Snell Labontory performed many of the cigarette smoke anelyaes for ?he Reader's Digest .
Co
~
. 38 Ln
per minute . The Wolman method and the Cambridge filter method2 smoked a fixed length of
cigarette (47 mm) regardless of the length of the cigarette being smoked and regardless of whether
it is a filter cigarette or not . Some of the methods smoke to a predetermined butt length, e .g ., 23
mm ; in such methods the length of cigarette smoked would vary depending upon the initial length
of cigarette being tested and whether or not it is a filter cigarette . The Liggett & Myers method
smokes fourteen puffs of each cigarette, so that the number of puffs taken determines the length
of the cigarette smoked .
TABLE APP B-1 : METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF TOTAL SOLIDS AND

NICOTINE
1.&M Tobacco Co.

Method (Keith and
Union'a Method Cambridge Filter 1957, 1958 ;
Smoking Wolman Method (Consumer Method (Wattman Foster D. Snell Newsome and Keith,
Conditions . etc . (Wolman . 1953) Reoocta . 1955) ft ol . . 1959) Meth (Kimbalb 1956 . 1957)
cigarette length 47 variable ; depends 47 variable ; dependa variable ; depends on

smoked, mm on length of on length of length of cigarette
tested tested
butt length, tnm variable ; depends 23 variable ; depends 23 variable ; depends on

on length of on length of length of cigarette
tested tested
number of puffs number required to number required to number required to number required to 14
consume 47 mm of attain 23-mm butt consume 47 mm of attain 23-mm butt
cigarette length cigarette length
puff volume 35 35 35 3S 44
puff duration 2 .0 2 .0 2 .0 1 .9
puff frequency, l l 1 1 2
no ./min
lab temp ., °C 25° not specified not specified not specified 23 .9°
lab RH, % 45% not :peeified not specified not specified 60%
cigarettes smoked 5 8 10 S 10°

per determination
cigarette selection selected for selected for selected for selected for selected for
uniformity In uniformity in uniformity In , uniformity In uniformity in
moiature content, moisture content, moisture content, moisture content, moisture content,
cigarette size (if cigarette aize (if cigarette size (if cigarette aize (if cigarette uze (if
feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feasible), weight, feaaible), weight,
firmness, and other firmness, and other firmness, and other firmness, and other firmneu, and other
characteristics characteristics characteristics characteristics characteristics
2 It should be noted In the Cambridge filter method as outlined by Ogg et ai . (1962) the cigarette under teat is smoked to a 30-mm butt
length . Further modificitiona of this method, including length of cigarette to be smoked, are under consideration by the Analytical Methods
Committee of the Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference .
39
Table APP B-1 . Continued :
L&M Tobacco Co .
Method (Keith and
Union's Method Cambridge Filter 1957, 1958;
Smoking Wolman Method (Consumer Method (Wartman Foster D. Sne11 Newsome and Keith,
Conditiona, etc . (Wolman. 19531 $Sports . 1955) t! 9 Method (Kimball) 1916, 1957)
determination of Solids (designated Smoke for deter- Cigarette MS is To determine solids The smoke in this
total solids as tan in the mination of both collected on a glass (tar content In the method is retained
publication) are nicotine and solids fiber filter material, communi-cation), on an a-cellulose
determined by is absorbed in Cambridge filter smoke Is collected trap . The a-cellulose
gravity deposition acidified alcohol. medium CM-! l3 . in acidified alcohol . is washed with hot
of smoke over 2S One portion of the The weight of The alcohol acidic methanol . The
m1of0.1N acidified alcoholic material retained in solution is heated solution is extracted
sulfuric acid . The solution is diluted the filter represents on a steam bath with chloroform . To
mixture Is extracted with water, then total solids (total (100°C) to deter-mine soltds
with chloroform, extracted with particulate matter). evaporate the (termed tar in the
and the chloroform chloroform . The Part of the material alcohol . After publications), the
extract ia heated to aqueoua layer ia retained on the about S hr, the chloroform solution
evaporate the made alkaline and Cambridge filter ia residue is heated in is evaporated on the
chloroform . The re-extracted with water. Thus, this the beaker at steam bath and
residue is then chloroform . The method Includes 105°C for 7 hr. heating is continued
heated, or dried, two chloroform water in the value The weight of for 3 hr at 105°C .
for 3 hr at 100°C . extracts are com- for total solids, material remaining Tar value is
The weight of bined, and the whereas the in the beaker ia determined by
• remaining material
after the heating ia
reported as tars .
chloroform
removed by
evaporation to yield
the tar, which is
Wolman Method
and the Consumers
Union Method do
not. .
designated as the
tar content.
weighing the
residue .
weighed .
determination of Solids for deter- Another portion of To determine To determine The extracted
nicotine mination of the acidified nicotine, the nicodnt, an aliquot methanol solution is
ntcodne are alcoholic solution is Cambridge filter of the acidified nude alkaline and is
collected over 10 treated with base with the retained alcohol solution steam-distilled .
ml alcohol acidified and ateam-diadlled . solids Is extracted containing the NTcodnt Is deter-
with sulfuric acid Mcodne in the with 0. 1 N aulfitric smoke solids is mined in the steam
in a 300-mi steam distillate ia acid . The solution, heated to remove distillate apectro-
i(ieldahl flask . measured apectro- after washing with the alcohol, the photometrically .
Solution Is treated photometricdly . chloroform, ia residue ia made
with alkali and then made alkaline and alkaline and is
ateatn-0iatilled . The is ateam4iatilled . ateam-diatilled .
distillate ia treated Nicotine In the Mcodne ia deter-
with ailicotungatic steam distillate ia mined gravimetri-
acid to precipitate determined either cally in the steam
the ailicotungatate . by the silicotungstic distillate (silico-
The ailicotung.tate acid method or by tungstic acid
la separated and ia the apectrophoto- method) .
ignited to an ash metrie method .
whose weight Is
used to calculate
the nicotine valueb .
' The authors recommended that three to six such determinations be carried out and the results averaged .
b Since other alkaloids coprecipiute with nicotine as ailicotung .tatea, this determination yields the alkaloid or total alkaloid
value .
•
40
From the foregoing it is apparent that each of the methods has adopted arbitrary smoking
habits for the smoking machine, which habits do not correspond with the habits of each individual
smoker . The volume of puff taken in smoking [Derr et al ., 1937 ; Cigarette Components, Ltd .,
1957 ; Schur and Rickards, 1955, 1957 ; Cuzin et al., 1958], the frequency of puffs [Derr et al .,
1937 ; Cigarette Components, Ltd ., 1957 ; Cuzin et al., 1958 ; Staub and Furrer, 1957 ; Bentley and
Burgan, 19613, and the duration of the puff [Derr et al ., 1937 ; Hilding, 1956 ; Schur and
Rickards, 1955, 1957 ; Cuzin et al ., 1958 ; Staub and Furrer, 1957 ; Bentley and Burgan, 1961]
vary among individuals. The length of the cigarette smoked, or the butt length to which cigarettes
are smoked also varies among smokers [Hilding, 1956 ; Cigarette Components, Ltd ., 1957; Schur
and Rickards, 1955, 1957 ; Finkner et al ., 1957; Bentley and Burgan, 1961] . These variations
necessarily mean that the amount of total solids and nicotine collected by the smoking machine
is not the same as what individual smokers receive .
It is obvious of course that all smokers do not retain 100% of the particulate phase as a
smoking machine is designed to do . The degree of inhalation differs appreciably among individuals
(Cigarette Components, Ltd ., 1957] . Moreover, smokers who inhale hold the smoke in the lungs
for different times, some exhaling more quickly than others [Mitchell, 1962] . The Amount of
particulate phase retained in the lungs obviously depends in part upon the time elapsing between
inhaling and exhaling . Smokers who do not inhale admit the smoke to their mouths ; the duration
of retention of the particulate phase in their mouths obviously affects the extent of retention of
solids [Mitchell, 1962] .
Other variations between smokers include the following :
• The burning temperature of cigarettes varies from smoker to smoker because of

differences in smoking habits [Cuzin et al ., 1958] .
• The pressure drop across a cigarette differs from smoker to smoker [Bradford et al .,
1936; Hilding, 1956 ; Schur and Rickards, 1955, 1957 ; Staub and Furrer, 1957 ; Cuzin
et al ., 1958] .
• The total number of puffs per cigarette and the time necessary to consume a cigarette
varies from smoker to smoker [Hilding, 1956 ; Bentley and Burgan, 1961] .
Successive puffs of an individual on the same cigarette may differ with respect to puff
volume, puff duration, and frequency, degree of inhalation, temperature change by puffing, and
pressure drop produced by smoking [Staub and Furrer, 1957] . The manner of smoking successive
cigarettes by an individual may also vary . These differences include length of cigarette consumed,
total number of puffs per cigarette, and time required to consume a cigarette (Staub and Furrer,
1957] .
All of the variations so far mentioned have been the subject of comment in the scientific
literature, and all would affect the amount of total solids and nicotine received by the individual
smoker as compared with a smoking machine . In addition, there are other variable factors, which
have not been reported in the scientific literature and which may affect the amount or composition
of total solids and nicotine delivered to or retained by a smoker . Some of the factors are :
• Smoking at very low temperatures and very low humidity . These conditions would
prevail in the winter in the northern states .
• Smokin,g at reduced pressure, e .g., in the mountainous states . There is some indication
41
NUMBER CONTROL PAGE
BATES NUMBER
NOT USED
517104899
that the rate of burning of a cigarette will differ depending upon the altitude at which the
cigarette is smoked .
• Smoking in areas which are either abnormally humid or abnormally dry.
• Smoking from a pack which has been opened for more than a day . The cigarettes may
lose appreciable moisture under and conditions . Although loss of moisture will not affect
weight of solids produced per cigarette', it is believed to affect the chemical composition
of smoke.
Variations in Cigarette s
The following variables affect the yield of total solids per gram of tobacco product consumed
and the composition of the smoke and total solids :
• Tobacco [Wynder and Hoffmann, 1963, 1964] .
Since tobacco is an agricultural commodity, it is not homogenous . Its characteristics vary from
leaf to leaf of the same plant and within the same leaf . And of course a variety of types, grades,
and blends of tobaccos are used in the manufacture of cigarettes, such as flue-cured, burley, and
Turkish tobaccos, and blends of such tobaccos .
• Processed tobacco (Wynder et al., 1959 ; Nicod, 1961 ; Cuzin et al, 1963 ; Uhlman,
1963] .
Just as different tobacco types and blends yield different amounts of total solids, homogenized
tobaccos (reconstituted tobacco sheet), on a per gram of processed tobacco consumed, yield
different amounts of total solids than does tobacco . Extraction of tobacco decreases the yield and
alters the composition of the total solids in MS and alters . Steaming of tobacco produces similar
changes .
• Number of cuts/inch [Wynder and Hoffmann, 1964] .
With the same tobacco type or the same blend, increasing the number of cuts per inch decreases
the total solids in MS .
• Filtration and pressure drop [Wynder and Hoffmann, 1960 ; Bock et al., 1962 ; Ayres et
al., 1963 ; Waltz and Hausermann, 1963] .
The higher the degree of filtration the lower the total solids ; the higher the pressure drop, the
lower the total solids. The efficiency of filters of the same design will vary from filter to filter
depending upon the construction or the manner in which the filter tow is packed.
• Paper porosity [Schur and Rickards, 1955,1957 ; Lipp and Van Hooy, 1962 ; Wynder and
Hoffmann, 1964] .
The cigarette paper which is normally supplied to the cigarette manufacturer usually has an
3 This has been shown to be Incorrect . Loaa of moisture from the tobacco filler affech the yields of both "tar" and nicotine .
• The study by Green et a! . (1982) showed that moisture loss from the cigarette filler had profound effects on the MS composition .
42
appreciable range of porosity . The solids in MS usually decrease as the porosity increases .
• Number of pt~`'s taken to consume a given length of cigarette [Newsome and Keith, 1956,
1957 ; Segelken et al., 1962] .
E.g ., burley tobacco buras at a greater rate than other tobacco types ; thus, a different number of
puffs are required to consume the same cigarette length of burley, flue-cured, and Turkish
tobaccos .
• Moisture content of cigarettes [Newsome and Keith, 1956, 1957 : Sato et al ., 1961 ;
Wynder and Hoffmann, 1964] .
The age of the cigarette, e.g., the length of time on the retailer's shelf, may affect the moisture
content of the filler.
• Variations in amounts of total solids and nicotine In each puff [Lindsey, 1959, 1962 ;
Kotin and Falk, 1960 ; Wynder and Hoffmann, 1961 ; Ayres et al., 1963] .
It has been suggested in the scientific literature that the amount and composition of total solids in
later puffs markedly exceeds that in earlier puffs [Lindsey, 1959, 1962 ; Kotin and Falk, 1960] ;
other investigators report finding very little difference between the mounts in the early and late
puffs [Wynder and Hoffmann, 1961 ; Ayres et al ., 1963] .
• Additives on tobacco [Alvord and Cardon, 1956 ; Lindsey et al ., 1959 ; Bentley and
Burgan, 1960 ; Candeli et al., 1960; Wynder and Hoffmann, 1961 ; Cuzin et al., 1963 ;
Scherback et al., 19631 .
The amount of total solids and composition of MS and solids vary with the amounts of additives
such as licorice and glycerol . It is impossible to apply these to tobacco uniformly .
• Humidity of analytical laboratory [Newsome and Keith, 1956, 1957 ; Sato et al ., 1961 ;
Wynder and Hoffmann, 1964] .
It is quite obvious that some of these variable are interdependent, e .g., filtration, paper porosity,
cuts/inch, filling capacity, and pressure drop .
Chanaes in the Comcosition of Smoke and Total Solids
It has been pointed out that the amount of total solids and nicotine produced by smoking can be
changed by a large number of variable factors, including the type of tobacco, the efficiency of the filter,
and the porosity of the cigarette paper. As has been mentioned in connection with such factors, they (and
probably others) may also change the ratio of various components of the smoke . As a result, the ratios of
the components in the total solids may be different .
43
f- -
APPENDIX C : DETERMINATION OF "TAR"' YIELD FROM
ULTRALOW-"TAR" CIGARETTES: SPECTROMETRY
The following paragraphs, slightly modified, are from a 1988 memorandum written
by Rodgman :
In the mid-1950s, Watson (1954) investigated the fluorescence of cigarette smoke and related
the difference in fluorescence between inhaled and exhaled cigarette MS to the degree of
particulate matter retention and the possible relationship to lung cancer causation . At the same
time, Schmghl and co-workers reported on their studies of the fluorescence of cigarette MS,
particularly with respect to the fluorescence of its particulate matter (SchmBhl et al ., 1954 ;
/
SchmAhl, 1955 ; SchmAhl and Schneider, 1955) . In fact, they used this analytical procedure to
estimate the degree of absorption of MS by the smoker during consumption of the cigarette . From
their fluorescence measurements on inhaled and exhaled MS particulate matter, Schm1hl et al .
(1954) estimated that as much as 90% of the MS particulate matter was retained in the lungs and
bronchi during deep inhalation. Subsequently, Wynder and Hoffmann (1960) claimed they had
confirmed the findings of SchmAhl et al . Neither Watson nor SchmBhl commented on the findings
of Bruce (1941) who reported that there was no correlation between fluorescence in general and
carcinogenicity .
Bentley and Burgan (1958) described the use of fluorescence techniques to estimate the levels V/
of several PAHs, including BaP, in a PAH-rich fraction derived from CSC . The use of
fluorescence spectroscopy to estimate PAHs (or BaP) is not surprising : UV fluorescence
spectroscopy was used by Hieger (1930, 1933) and Cook et al . (1932, 1933) in their concentration ~Ie ,/
of the PAHs in coal tar and the isolation of BaP and other tumorigenic PAHs from the PAH-rich
coal-tar fraction in the early 1930s .
However, it should be noted that the fluorescence of a solution of cigarette MS particulate

matter is not due solely to the PAHs contained therein . E.g., Duggan et al. (1957) noted in their r
study of the fluorescence properties of compounds of biological interest that, in addition to the
PAHs and structurally similar heterocyclic compounds, many classes of compounds such as
phenols, aromatic amines, and conjugated polyenes exhibited pronounce fluorescence properties .
All of these classes of compounds are now known to be present in CSC . Glycerol and propylene
g.lycol, major tobacco additives which appear in MS, are .UV transparent at the absorption or
fluorescence wavelengths used .
McConnell et al . (1960r'used fluorescence techniques in their method to evaluate the r

efficiency of various cigarette filtefs-in particulate matter removal from MS . They did note that
the fluorescence intensity of solutions of cigarette MS particulate matter was linearly proportional
to the weight of MS particulate matter . However,'ate the high-"tar" deliveries (about 30 mg/cigt)
of the 1960 cigarettes, it was noted that the gravimetric method was more rapid and slightly more
accurate than the fluorescence method . A similar procedure ftc described by Smit (1972) in his P/
determination of filter tip efficiency for particulate matter removaTfratQMS .
Burton et al. (1977) confirmed the findings of McConnell et al . (1960) on the linearity
r
between fluorescence and particulate matter weight and also noted the fluorescence method was
more accurate and less time consuming for low-"tar" cigarettes than the gravimetric method used
in the FTC procedure . Three years later, Thomas et al . (1980) described an automated method,
base on fluorescence technology, for the determination of FTC "tar" in the MS of low-"tar"
delivery cigarettes .
ILe UV absorption method described by Sloan and Curran (1981) for estimation of per
cigarette "tar" yields is similar to the UV fluorescence procedure . A modification (Hege, 1980)
of the Sloan-Curran UV procedure was used at RJRT R&D in low-"tar" studies and in Premier
studies (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co ., 1988). K
45
X. REFERENCES
Adams PI (1966), Measurements on Puffs Taken by Human Smokers . 20th TOB . CHEM. RES. CONF., Winston-Salem NC : Paper No . 3l .
Adams P1, (1976), Changes in Personal Smoking Habits Brought About by Changes In Cigarette Smoke Yields . PROC . 6th INTERNAT. TOB .
SCI. CONG., Tokyo, Japan, 1976 : 102-108.
Aksu S and Enercan S(19S8a), New Apparatus and Method for Determining Nicotine and Total Tar in Tobacco Smoke . INHISARLAR
ENSTITULERI RAPORLARI 7.• 202-209 .
Aksu S and Enercan S (1958b), The Amount of Nicotine and Tar In the Smoke of Cigarettes Made from Blended and Some Individual Turkish
Tobaccos . INHISARLAR ENSTITULERI RAPORLARI 7.• 210-215 .
Alvord ET and Cardon SZ (1956), The Inhibition of the Formation of 3,4-Benzpyrene in Cigarette Smoke . BRIT . J . CANCER 10.- 498-503 .
American Cancer Society (1949), Discussion Panel Moderated by tkhsner A, Heston WE, and DeCamp PT. PROC. 1st NATL. CANCER
CONF : 203 .
Artho AJ and Grob K(1963), Distribution of Nicotine between the Vapour and Particulate Phases of Cigarette Smoke . 17th TOB . CHEM. RES .
CONF., Montreal PQ, Canada : Paper No . 10 .
Anho Al and Grob K (1964), Nikotinabsocption aus dem Cigarettenrauch . Z. PRAVENT.-MED. 9• 1425 .
Asmua E, Hbhne R, and Kraetsch J(1962), Photometrische Beatinunung von Nicotin und Pyridin im Tabaknuch . Z. ANAL. CHEM. 187.• 33-
37 .
Auerbach 0, Hammond EC, and Garfinkel L (1979), Changea in Bronchial Epithelium in Relation to Cigarette Smoking, 1955 - 1960 va 1970
- 1977 . NEW ENG. J. MED . 300: 381 .
• Auerbach 0, Hammond EC, and Garfutkel L (1980), Changes in Bronchial Epithelium : Then and Now . In God GB and Bock FO (Editors),
A Sqfe Q'garerraT Banbury Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 141-154 .
Ayres CI, Fordyce WB, and Hughes 1W (1963), Cigarettes : The Potential of Tobacco to Produce Smoke . 17th TOB. CHEM. RES. CONF.,
Montreal PQ, Canada: Paper No. 07.
Ayres PH, Shreve WK, and Coggina CRE (1990), Use of a Near-Infrared (NIR) Device for the Determination of Nicotine in Smoke Presented
to Animals ia lnhalation Studies. 44th TOB. CHEM. RES. CONF., Winaton-Salem NC : Paper No. 63 .
Barkemeyer H and Seehofer F (1960), Zur Spektrophotometrlschen Bestimmung des Nicotins in Tabak und Tabakrauchkondensaten . Z .
LEBENSM. UNTERSUCH. U. FORSCH . 112:S0-S2 .
Batu L and Toole E(1931), Microtitrimetric Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco Smoke . ANGEW . CHEM. 44: 682-683 .
Barta L and Toole E(1932a), lrJber den Nikotin- und Ammoniakgehalt des Cigarettentabakrauches . ANGEW . CHEM. 4S: 43 .
Barta L and Toole B(1932b), Ober den Nikotin- und Ammonlakgehalt des Cigarettentabakrauches . ANGEW. CHEM . 46: 671-673 .
Baskevitch N and Ferrer G(1982), Modification of the Nicotine :Tar Ratio through the Use of Reconstituted Tobacco . CORESTA 1982 SYMP,,
Winston-Salem NC, USA, CORESTA INF. BULL., Spec. Edition 1982: Paper STI, 31 .
Bates WB, Griffith RB, Harlow ES, Senkua M, and Wakeham H (1967), Detetmination and Reporting of Total Particulate Matter, Water in
Total Particulate Matter, and Nicotine In Cigarette Smoke . VIRGINIA J. SCI . 18: 130-135 .
Bates WB, Griffith RB, Harlow ES, Senkus M, and Wakeham H (1968), Determination and Reporting of Total Particulate Matter, Water in
Total Particulate Matter, and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . TOB . SCI . 12: 192-196.
Baumberger JP (1923a), The Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke . J . PHARM . EXP . THERAP. 21 : 35-46 .
Baumberger JP (1923b), Amount of Smoke Produced from Tobacco and Its Absorption in Smoking as Determined by Electrical Precipatation .
J. PHARM. EXP. THERAP . 21 : 47-57 .
46
Bentley HR and Burgan JO (1958), Polynuclear Hydrocarbons in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . i . 3,4-Benzpyrene . ANALYST 83: 442-447 .
Bentley HR and Burgan 10 (1960) . Polynuclear Hydrocarbons in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . m . The Inhibition of the Formation of 3,4-
Benzpyrene in Cigarette Smoke . ANALYST 8S: 727-730 .
Bentley HR and Burgan 10 (1961), Cigarette Smoke Condensate : Preparation and Routine Laboratory Estimation . Research Paper No. 4 : Second
Edition . TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS' STANDING COMMITTEE, Loadon UK .
Biederbeck 1 (1908), New Investigation of the Absorption of Nicotine and Ammonia from Contaminated Air and Tobacco Smoke . Theeia,
Wurzburg University : 1-26 .
Bock FO, Moore GE, Dowd JE, and Clark PC (1962), Carcinogenic Activity of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . Biological Activity of Refined
Tar from Certain Branda of Cigarettes . J. AM. MED. ASSOC . 181: 668-673 .
Bodnar J(1930a), Composition of Tobacco Smoke and Denicotinization of Tobacco . TERMESZETTUDOMANYI KOZLONY 62 : 397-404 .
Bodnar J(1930b), Composition of Tobacco Smoke and Denicotinization of Tobacco . TERMESZETTUDOMANYI KOZLONY 62: 443-W .
Bodnar J, Nagy VL, and Dickmann S (1935), Uptake of Nicotine by the Human Organism during Smoking : Fate of Nicotine . BIOCHEM. Z .
276: 317-322 .
Bogen E and Loomis RN (1932), Tobacco Tar : An Experimental Investigation of Its Carcinogenic Action . AM. J. CANCER 16: 1315-1521 .
Bogner H(1921), Determination of the Nicotine Content of Cigarette Smoke . Medical Inaugural Dissertation, Erlangen .
Bolm F(1930) .On Smoke, Nicotine Umit Values, and the Nicotine Determination Method of Pfyl and Schmitt . Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM .
59. 602-606 .
Bourlaa MC and Eapetdy RC (1972), The Determination of Nicotine in Particulate Matter Using Citric Acid and Bromomaleic Acid . 26th TOB .
CHEM. RES. CONF., Wiltiamaborg VA : Paper No . 24.
Bourlas MC, Thomaa CE, Eaperdy RC, and Kuhn WF (1976), The Determination of Nicotine in Particulate Matter Using Citric Acid and
Bromomaleic Acid . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH. 8: 334358 .
Bradford JA, Harlan WR, and Hanmer HR (1936), Nature of Cigaret Smoke : Technic of Experimental Smoking . IND. ENG . CHEM . 28: 836-
839 .
Bradford JA, Harlow ES, Harlan WR, and Hanmer HR (1937), Nature of Cigaret Smoke : Volatile Bases and Acids . IND . ENG . CHEM. 29:
45-50.
Brauer K (1930), Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . CHEM. ZTG . SJ: 354-355 .
Braun C(1931), Estimation of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . PHARM . ZENTRALHALLE 71 : 209-213 .
Broach A(1900), Theorotiache und experimentelle Unterauchungen zur Pathogenesis und Histogenesis der malignen Geechwulste . ARCH.
PATH . 162: 32-84 .
Bruce WF (1941), J . AM . CHEM SOC . 63: 304.
Brunnemann KD, HofGttann D, Wynder EL, and Gori (3B (1976), Detenmination of Tar, Nicotine, and Carbon Monoxide In Cigarette Smoke .
A Comparison of International Smoking Conditiotu . In Wynder EL, Hoffmann D, and flori GB (Editors), Mod{/yfng the Rtsk jor rhe Smoker .
Proc . 3nd World Coqj. on Smoking and lfeolrit. DHEW Pttb1. No. (NIH) 76-1221, Voi .1t 441-449.
Button FQ, Veal JT, and Phelps DW (1977), Analysia of Cigarotte Tars Using Fluorescent Spectroscopy . NATL . MTG., AM . CHEM . SOC.,
New Orlana LA: Paper No . 31 .
Campbell DR (1978), Determination of Nicotine on Cigarette Filters or Cambridge Pads . RDM, 1978, No . 6(Febnury 13) .
Candeli A, Lindsey AJ, and Persaud K (1960), Catta di Sigarette al Sulfammato di Ammonio a Idrocarburi Cancerigeni . BOL . SOC . ITAL.
BIOL . SPER. 96: 4S24S4 .
Cano JP, Catalin 1, Badrd R, Dumaa C, Viala A, and t3uillerm R (1970), DEtenmination de la Nicotine par Chromatographie en Phaze Ciaseuse .
47
II . Applications . ANN. PHARMACEUT . FRANC. 28: 633-640 .
Charles JL, Stahr HM, and Ikeda RM (1969), Automated Determination of Nicotine In Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette Smoke . TOB. SCl .
13: 3458 .
Cigarette Componenta, Ltd . (1957), Cigarette Smoking : Study of Certain Aspects of Human Smoking Habits . CIGARETTE COMPONENTS,
LTD. PAMPHLET (October) .
Cogbill EC, Wartnun WB Jr, and Harlow ES (1959) . Cigarette Smoke . II. Some Variable Affecting the Water Content of the Particulate Phase .
TOB. SCI . .f: 136-138 .
Consumer Reports (1955), Cigarettes : A Three-Part Report . CONSUMER RPTS. 20 (2) : 56-74. 2
Cook JW, Hewett CL, and Hieger I(1932), Coal-Tar Constituents and Cancer . NATURE 130: 126 .
Cook JW, Hewett CL, and Hieger I(1933), Isolation of a Cancer-Producing Hydrocarbon from Coal Tar . II . Isolation of 1,2- and 4,5-
Benzopyrenea, Perylene, and 1,2-Benzanthracene . J . CHEM . SOC . 395-398 .
Cooper EA, Lamb FWM, Sanders E, and Hiret EL (1932), The Role of Tobacco Smoking in the Production of Cancer . J . HYG . (London)
32: 293-300 .
CORESTA (1966a), Standard Method No . 1 : Recommended Methods for Machine Smoking and for the Determination of Cigarette Smoke
Condensate . CORESTA SCI . COMM. SMOKE STUDY GROUP, Lea Rasses, Switutiand: 1-9.
CORESTA (1966b), Standard Method No . 2a Recommended Method for the Determination of Total Alkaloids as Nicotine in Tobacco .
CORESTA SCI. COMM. SMOKE STUDY GROUP, Lea Rasaee, Switzerland : 1-3 .
CORESTA (1966c), Standard Method No . 3 : Recommended Method for the Determination of Total Alkaloida in Tobacco Smoke Condensate .
CORESTA SCI. COMM . SMOKE STUDY GROUP, Lea Ruaee, Switreaiand : 1-2 .
CORESTA (1966d), Standard Method No . 4 : Recommended Method for the Determination of Nicotine Alkaloid Retention by Cigarette Filters .
CORESTA SCi . COMM . SMOKE STUDY GROUP, Lea Rauea, Switzerlaod : 1-4 .
CORESTA (1969a), Standard Method No .10 : Machine Smoking of Cigarettes, Detecmination of Crude and Dry Smoke Condensate . CORESTA
INF. BULL. 1969 (1): 24-33 .
CORESTA (1969b), Standard Method No . 12 : lkterminationof Alkaloids in Cigarette Smoke Condensate . CORESTA INF. BULL.1969 (2):
7-8 .
CORESTA (1986), Recommended Method No . 7 : Determination of Nicotine in the Mainstream Smoke of Cigarettes by Gas Chromatographic
Analysis . CORESTA INF. BULL . 1986 (3/4) : 39-41 .
CORESTA (1987), Recommended Method No . 8 : Determination of Water in the Mainstream Smoke of Cigarettes by Gas Chromatographic
Analysis . CORESTA INF. BULL .1987 (!) : 21-23 .
CORESTA (1989a), Recommended Method No . 22: Routine Analytical Cigarette-Smoke Machine Specifications, Definitiona and Standard
Conditions . CORESTA INF. BULL. 1989 (4) : 28-53 .
CORESTA (1989b), Recommended Method No . 23 : Determinadon ofTotal and Nicodne-Free Dry Particulate Matter Using a Routine Analytical
Cigarette-Smoking Machine . Detentdnation ofTotal Particulate Matter and Preparation for Water and Nicotine Measurements . CORESTA INF.
BULL. 1989 (4): 54-85 .
CORESTA (1990), Recommended Method No . 1S : Cigarettes - Determination of Water in Smoke Condenaatea - Karl Fischer Method .
CORESTA INF. BULL .1990 (2) : 11-16 .
Crowell EP (1960), Determination of Moisture In Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette by Near-Infnred Spectrophotometry .14tL TOB . CHEM .
RES. CONF., VVinaton-Salem NC : Paper No . 30 .
Crowell EP, Kuhn WF, Resnik FE, and Varsel CJ (1961), The Determination of Moisture in Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette Smoke by
Near-Infrared Spectrophotometry . TOB . SCI .1: 3437 .
Cundifi'RH and Markunas PC (1953), A Rapid Titrimetric Procedure for the Determination of Nicotine, Notnicotine, and Total Alkaloids in
48
Tobacco and Tobacco Products . 7th TOB . CHEM. RES. CONF., Winston-Salem NC : Paper No. 03 .
Cundiff RH and Markunas PC (1955), Determination of Nicotine, Nornicotine, and Total Alkaloids in Tobacco . ANAL . CHEM . 27: 1650-
1653 .
Cuzin JL, et al . (1959), L'Acte Specifique du Fumeur. Analyse de Quelquea (kandeun Paramftriquea sur une Population Reatreinte de Sujetr
Furneurs . PROC . 2nd INTERNAT . SCI . TOB . CONG., Brttssela, Belgiam, 1958 : 521-535 .
Cuzin JL, Testa A, Teata S, and Anguerra a(1963), Chemical and Biological Control of Condensates from Smoked Tobacco Treated after the
Neukomm-Bonnet Process . Z. PRAVENTIVMED . 28: 125-137 .
Dabrowaka O(1949), Nicotine, Resins, Reducing Agents In the Smoke of Polish Cigarettes from Different Flue-Cured and Turkish Type
Tobaccos . PRACE TYTONIOWE ZESZYT 149-165 .
Dalhamn T (1968), Effect of Different Doses of Tobacco Smoke on Ciliary Activity In Cat . Variations in Amount of Tobacco Smoke, Interval
Between Cigarettes, Content of 'Tar' . Nicotine, and Phenol. In Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(Editon), Toward a Less Hanvl/ul Ctgarette,
NATL. CANCER INST . MONOGRAPH 28 : 79-87 .
DeBardeleben MZ, Wickham JE, and Kuhn WF (1991), The Determination of Tar and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke from an Historical
Perspective. RECENT ADV. TOB . SCI . 17.• 115-148 .
Derr RB, Riesmeyer AH, and Unangst RB (1937), Removal of Undeairable Constituents from Tobacco Smoke, IND . ENG . CHEM. 29: 771-
776.
Deutsch LJ and Jeffords AL (1994), Simultaneous Gas Chromatographic Nicotine/Water Analysis in Smoke Via Split Ic4ection on Dual Capillary
Column. . 48th TOB. CHEM. RES CONF., Greeosboro NC: Paper No . 35 .
Deutsch IJ and Robertson RM (1991), Variability in the Determination of Water in Tobacco Smoke . 45th TOB . CHEM . RES . CONF.,
Ashe.iile NC : Paper No. 21 .
DeVriea A, DeBoer M, and SchOrer D (1976), A Fully Automated Ultraviolet Method for the Determination of Nicotine Alkalaoida In Tobacco
and Tobacco Smoke Condensate . TOB . SCI . 20: 64-66 .
Diffee JT (1975), Automated Determination of Nicotine Alkaloids In Cigarette Smoke Total Particulate Matter. R&DM, 1986, No . 110 (July
2S) .
Diffee JT and Sheppard M (1971), An Automated Method for the Determination of Nicotine Alkaloids in Cigarette Smoke Using Cyanogen
Bromide . 25th TOB . CHEM. RES. CONP., Louisrille KY : Paper No. 26 .
Dobbins IT Jr (1984), Puffing Parameters : The Effects of Puff Frequency and Puff Volume Variables on 'Tar' and Nicotine Yields and on
Burning Timea of 100-mm and 120-mm Cigarettes . R&DM, 1984, No. 10 (February 27) .
Dube MF and Green CR (1982), Methods of Collection of Smoke for Analytical Purposes. RECENT ADV. TOB. SCI. 8: 422-102 .
Duggan DE, Bowman RL, Brodie BB, and Udenfiiend S(1937), A SpectroAuorometric Study of Compounds of Biological Interest . ARCH.
BIOCHEM. BIOPHYS . 68: 1-14 .
Ehriamann O(1931), Studies on Nicotine and the Denicotin'vation of Tobacco Smoke . II. Z. HYG . INFEKTIONSKRANKH . 112: 698-707 .
Federal Trade Commission (1966), News Release (2S March) .
Federal Trade Commission (1967a), Cigarettes : Testing for Tar and Nicotine Content . FED. REGISTER 32: 11178 .
Federal Trade Commission (1967b), "Tar" and Nicotine of the Smoke of 59 Varieties of Cigarettes . (November, 1967) .
Federal Trade Commiwion (1968) . "Tar" and Nicotine of the Smoke of 122 Varieties of Cigarettes .
Federal Trade Commiuion (1978), "Tar" and Nicotine of the Smoke of 167 Varieties of Cigarettes .
Federal Trade Commission (1981), "Tar," Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide of the Smoke of 187 Varieties of Cigarettes . (March, 1981) .
Federal Trade Commission (1985), "Tar," Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide of the Smoke of 207 Varieties of Domestic Cigarettes . (January,
49
1985) .
Filk H, StBrmer S, and Loeser A(1914), Untersuchungen Ober den Gehalt von Zigarettenrauch an Nikotin . ARZNEIMITTELFORSCH . 4 :
367-368 .
Finkner AL, Horvitz DO, Foradori GT, Fleischer J, and Monroe 1(1957), An Investigation of the Measurement of Current Smoking by
Individuals. UNCCH INST . STAT., MIMEO SERIES NO. 177 (July).
FiahellB (1959), The Detertnination of Moisture in the Total Solids of Cigar Smoke .13th TOB . CHEM . RES . CONF., Lexington KY : Paper
No. 17 .
Fishel JB (1960), The Determination of Moisture In the Total Particulate Matter of Cigar Smoke . TOB. SCI. 4: 198-200 .
Gaivoronachi BS, Marinescu P, and Petrute V (1978), Contributions to Nicotine Determination by Gaa Chromatography . CORESTA 1978
SYMP., Sofia, Bulgaria, CORESTA INF . BULL., Spec . Edition 1978 : Paper 5044, 113-1 l4.
Georgiev S(1969), Analytical Expression for the Amount of Total Condensate and Nicotine in the Smoke from a Single Cigarette . NAUCH .
TR. VISSH . KHRANIT . VKUSOVA PROM. PLOVDIV. 15 (Pt.p:
Giles JA (1969), Historical Review of Nicotine and Particulate Matter in the Smoke of Selected Cigarette Brands . RDM, 1969, No . 34 (May
20) .
Giles JA and Sullivan BN (1969), Modified Determination of Nicotine and Water in Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette Smoke . RDM, 1969,
No. 36 (May 22) .
Gori GB (Editor) (1976a), Report No. 1 . Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. JTu Ftrrt Set ojF.rperimental Cigarettes . DHEW Pubt. No . (NIH)
76-905.
Gori GB (Editor) (1976b), Report No . 2. Toward Less Hazardous CYgareues . 7he Second Set ojErperimenta! Cigarettes . DHEW Pubt. No.
(NIH) 76-1111 .
Gori GB (Editor) (1977), Report No. 3. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes . The 7lrtnd Set ojErperimenta! Cigarettes . DHEW Publ . No. (NIH)
77-1280 .
Goei GB (Editor) (1980), Report No . 4. Toward Less Hazardous Cigarettes. 7fu Fourth Set of Erperimenml Cigarettes . DHEW Pubi . (NIH)
Manch (198(1).
Gori GB and Bock FO (Editon) (1980), A Safe Ctgarettet Banbury Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY .
Gravea H(1967), Determination of Water in Cambrtdge-Filtered Cigarette Smoke Employing Single PuffGae Chromatographic Analysis . RDM,
1967, No. 3S (July 10) .
Green CR, Conrad FW Jr, Dube MF, Harris JL, and Angel AL (1982), Dry Cigarette Chemistry . R&DR, 1982, No . S(Auguat 4) .
Griffith RB (1957), The Rapid Determination of Total Alkaloida by Steam Distillation . TOB . SCI . 1 : 130-137 .
Griffith RB and Jeffrey RN (1948), Improved Steam-Distillation Apparatus : Application to Determination of Nicotine in Green and Dry Tobacco .
ANAL. CHEM. 20: 307-311 .
Gritaiute LA and Mironova Al (1960), The Carcinogenic Action of Tobacco Tar . VOPROSY ONKOL. 6: 25-33 .
Gwynn RH (1954), Studies on Promotion of Tumour Development (Co-Carcinogeneaia) . BRIT. EMP. CANCER CAMP ., ANN. RPT . 32:
171-172 .
Gwynn RH and Salaman MH 1956), Tests of Tobacco Products for Tumour Initiation and Promotion in Mouse Skin . BRIT . EMP. CANCER
CAMP., ANN . RPT. 54.279 .
Hahn M and ilttriamann 0(1931), Studies on Nicotine and the Denicotinization of Tobacco Smoke .l . Z. HYG . INFEKTIONSKRANKHEIT
112 : 680-697 .
Hahn M and Langer H(1920), Tobacco Smoke and Nicotine and a Biological Method for the Quantitative Determination of Nicotine . Z . HYG .
INFEKTIONSKRANKHEIT 90: 22-36 .
50
Hamer D and Woodhouse DL (1956), Biological Tests for Carcinogenic Action of Tar from Cigarette Smoke . BRIT. J . CANCER 10: 49-53 .
Hammond EC (1980), The Long-Term Benefits of Reducing Tar and Nicotine in Cigarettes . In Gori GB and Bock FO (Editors), A Sq/e
Cigarette? Banbury Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 13-18 .
Hammond EC, Garfinkel H, SEidman H, and Law EA (1976), "Tar" and Nicotine Content of Cigarette Smoke in Relation to Death Rates .
ENVIRON. RES . 12: 263 .
Harbin BA and Stamey TW (1975), Automated Data Acquisition and Processing of the FTC 'Tar' Analyses . 29th TOB. CHEM. RES . CONF.,
College Patic MD: Paper No . 18 .
Harrell TO and Sullivan BN Jr (1963) . Study of Methods for the Determination of Nicotine and Particulate Matter in Cigarette Smoke . RDM,
1963, No. 49 (June 27) .
Hartung HA and Steward LL (1973), Puff-by-Puff Delivery Equations for Tar, Nicotine and Water . 27th TOB . CHEM . RES. CONF.,
Wiostoo-Salem NC : Paper No . 20B.
Harvey WR, Badgett CE, and Resnik FE (1966), The Determination of Nicotine Alkaloids in Tobacco Leaf, Cigarette Filler, and TPM by Acid-
Methanol Extraction. 20th TOB . CHEM. RES . CONF., Wiuston-Salem NC : Paper No. iS .
Harvey WR, Badgett CE, and Resnik FE (1967), Nicotine Alkaloids in Tobacco Leaf, Cigarette Filler, and Particulate Matter of Smoke by Acid-
Methanol Extraction . TOB. SCI . 11 : 8486 .
Hege RB Jr (1970), Qyantitative Determination of Benzo(a)pyrene in Tobacco Smoke for Twenty-Eight Competitive Brands . RDM, 1970, No.
8 (February 2) .
Hege RB Jr (1979), Gas Chromatognphic Determination of Hunxctants in Smoke . RDM, 1979, No . 41 (October 25) .
Hege RB 1r (1980), Spectrophotometric Determination of Smoke 'Tar' In Ultralow Cigarettes . RDM, 1980, No . 31 (September 18) .
Heiduschska A (1930), Erfahrung bel der Nikotinbestimmung im Tabak und im Rauch . PHARM. ZENTRAL-HALLE 71 : 305-306.
Heiduschska A and Post E(1932), Ober die Bestimmung des Nikotins im Tabakrauch . PHARM. ZENTRAL-HALLE 73 : 529-530 .
Helwig FC (1928), Growth Producing-Effects of Extracts of Tobacco on Mice . J. AM. MED. ASSOC . 91: 150-151 .
Herning RI, Jones RT, Bachman J, and Mines AH (1981), Puff Volume Increases When Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Are Smoked . BRIT. MED.
J . 283 (6285) : 187-189 .
Hieger I(1930), Spectra of Cancer-Producing Tars and Oils and of Related Substances . BIOCHEM . J. 24: 505 .
Hieger 1(1933), Isolation of a Cancer-Producing Hydrocarbon from Coal Tar . I . Concentration of the Active Substance . J. CHEM. SOC . 385-
395 .
Hilding AC (1956), On Cigarette Smoking, Bronchial Carcinoma, and Ciliary Action . I . Smoking Habits and Measurement of Smoke Intake .
NEW ENG. J. MED . 2J<: 774781 .
Hoffmann D (1989), Nicotine, a Tobacco-Specific Precursor for Carcinogens . In Wald N and Froggatt P(Editon), Mcotine . Snaking, and rhe
Low-Tar PArogramnte. Oxford University Press, New York NY : 24-40 .
Hoffmann D, LaVoie EJ, and Hecht SS (1985), Nicotine : A Precursor for Carcinogens . CANCER LETT. 26: 67-75 .
Hoffmann D, Rivenson A, Chung FL, and Hecht SS (1991a), Relevance of Nicotine-Derived 1KNitrowmines in Tobacco Carcinogenesis . In
Adlkofer FX, and Thurau K (Editors), Efficrs ojMcodne on Biological Sysumr, ADV . PHARMACOL. SCI ., Biohiuser Verlag, Birkhauser,
Basel, Switzerland: 89-101 .
Hott'mann D, Rivenson A, Chung FL, and Hecht SS (1991b), Nicotine-Derived 11t•Nitrosamines and Their Relevance in Tobacco Carcinogenesis .
CRIT. REV. TOXICOL . 21 : 305-311 .
Hoffmann D, Rivenson A, and Hecht SS (1984), The Role of Nicotine in Tobacco Carcinogenesis . TRIBUTE R . TRUHAUT, FAC . PHARM .,
Uni . . Paris, Paris, Fronce : 491-495 .
51
Hofmann B(1933), Semimicro- and Microcolorimetric Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . BIOCHEM. Z . 260: 26-33 .
Hofmann B(1942), Quantitative spektralanalytische Bestimmung von Nikotin und Pyridin . ARCH. HYG. 128: 179-186 .
Hofmann E, Schreus HT, and Zutfielle B(1923), Beobachtungenzur experimentellen f3eachwulsterzeugung durch Teer venchiedener Herkunft
und Paraffin, MED. WCHNSCHR. I9: 633-634 .
Holmes IC and Cridlin WB (1960), Moisture in the Total Particulate Matter and Gas Phase of Cigarette Smoke . J . ASSOC. OFFIC. ANAL.
CHEM. 43 : S1S-S18 .
International Standards Organization (1986), Cigarettes - Routine Cigarette-Smoking Machine - Definitions and Standard Conditions . Second
Edition. ISO 3308 .
International Standards Organization (1987a), Cigarettes - Determination of Total and Dry Particulate Matter Using a Routine Analytical
Cigarette-Smoking Machine - Electrostatic Smoke Trap Method . ISO 8453 .
Interttational Standards Organization (1987b), Cigarettes - Determination of Total and Dry Particulate Matter Using a Routine Analytical
CigaretteSmoking Machine - Olau Fibre Smoke Trap Method . ISO 4387 .
International Standards Organization (1989s), Tobacco and Tobacco Products - Cigarettes - Determination of Nicotine Content in Smoke
Condensates - Gas Chromatographic Method . ISO DP 10 315.
International Standards Organization (1989b), Cigarettes - Determination of Alkaloids in Smoke Condensates - Spectrometric Method . ISO
3400 .
Izawa M and Kobashi Y(1956), Analysis of Tobacco Smoke . U . Distribution of Nicotine in Smoke and Butt . Comparison between'King-Size'
and Regular-Size Cigarettes . J . AGR. CHEM . SOC . JAPAN 30: 332-335 .
Iuwa M, Kobashi Y, Tokurs C, Motomatau M, Fukaya T . and Yamamoto T(1956a), Studies on Tobacco Smoke . I. Distribution of Nicotine
in Smoke and Butt of Cigarettes . 1 . Comparison of Regular-Size Cigarettes According to Quantities of Shredded Tobacco Filler . SCI . PAPERS,
CENT. RES. INST., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP. 96: 79-84.
Izewa M, Kobashi Y, Tokura C, and Sakaguchi S (1956b), Studies on Tobacco Smoke . I. Distribution of Nicotine in Smoke and Butt of
Cigarettes . 2 . Comparison of Ring-Size and Regular-Size Cigarettes . SCL PAPERS, CENT . RES. INST ., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP . 96:
86-90 .
Jaffe R, Jaffe W, and Potenza L(1946), Accion cancerigena de Alquitnn de Cigarillo y de Chimo . REV. SAN . ((aratas)11 : 387-390 .
Jarrell JE and Wickham JE (1961), Moisture in Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette Smoke .lSth TOB . CHEM. RES . CONF., Philadelphia
PA: Paper No. 18 .
Jarrell JE and Wickham JE (1962), The Determination of Moisture In the Total Particulate Matter of Cigarette Smoke . TOB. SCI. 6: 154-157.
Jarvik ME, Popek P. Schneider NO, B .er-Weiw V, and Oritz ER (1978), Can Cigarette Size and Nicotine Content Influence Smoking and
Puffing Rates? PSYCHOPHARMACOL . 58. 303 .
Jensen CO and Haley D(1933), Studies on the Nicotine Content of Cigarette Smoke . J. AGR. RES. 51: 267-276.
Johnson JC (1986), Development of Machine Smoking Panmeters for Measurement of Cigarette Tar Yield in the United Kingdom . J. ASSOC.
OFF. ANAL. CHEM. 69: 598-600.
Kakhlanl ZN (19SS), Cancerogenic Action of Tobacco Tar. VOPROSY ONKOL.1 : 96-100 .
Keith CH (1976), Filtration as a Means of Reduction of Tar and Nicotine Levels in Tobacco Smoke . In Wynder EL, Hoffmann D, and Tso TC
(Editon), Mod*ng rhe RakJor the Smoker. Proe . dni World Co,tl on SmoAing and Heolrh,197S, Vol . 1, DHEW Petbl. No. (NIH) 761221 :
49-55 .
Keith CH and Newsome JR (1956), An Automatic Smoking Machine for the Quantitative Determination of the Differences between Cigarettes .
10th TOB . CHEM . RES. CONF., Washington DC : Paper No . 15 .
Keith CH and Newsome JR-(1957), Quantititive Studies on Cigarette Smoke . I . An Automatic Smoking Machine . TOB . SCI. 1: 51-57.
~
~
52 r
m
Keith CH and Newaome JR (1958), Quantitative Studies on Cigarette Smoke . lIi . Methods of Analysis for Filter Cigarettes . TOB. SCI. 2 : 14-19.
Kimball CS (Foster D . Snell), Methodology Employed in Determination of Tar and Nicotine Content of Cigarette Smoke for 7Ju Readcr's
Digest.
Kiaaling R (1882a), The Nicotine Content of Cigar Smoke Considered Simultaneously with Other Poisonous Combustion Products of Tobacco .
DINGLERS POLYTECH . J. 244: 64-71 .
Kissling R (1882b), The Nicotine Content of Cigar Smoke and the Simultaneous Consideration of the Toxic Action of the Combustion Products
of Tobacco . DINGLERS POLYTECH . J. 24I: 234246 .
Koperina AW (1934), The Balance of Nicotine in the Smoking of Tobacco In Cigarettes . TABACHNAYA PROMYSH . 1934 ((5) : 37-40 .
Kosak AI (1954), The Composition of Tobacco Smoke . EXPERIENTIA 10: 69-71 .
Kotin P and Falk HL (1960), The Role and Action of Environmental Agents in the Pathogenesis of Lung Cancer . II . Cigarette Smoke . CANCER
1J: 250-262 .
Kovalenko B(1931), The Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke . In Schmuk A (Editor), Research on the Chemtstry of Tobacco,
GOSUDARSTVENNYi INST. TABAKOVEDENIYA Publ . No . 80: 77-85 .
Kuhn H (1959), Beitrag zur apektrophotometriachen Bestimmung des Nikotins im Tabak und Tabakrauch. FACHLICHE MITT. OSTERR .
TABAKREGIE 1959 (3): 1-4
Kuhn H and Marek J(1961), Beitng zur Bestimmung des Rauchkondenaatea im Filterzigaretten . FACHLICHE MITT . OSTERR .
TABAKREGIE 1961 (1) : 1-6 .
Laurene AH and Harrell TO (1955), A Spectrophotometric Method for the Determination of Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . RDR, 1955, No. 14
(December 27) .
Laurene AH and Harrell TO (1958), Improved Spectrophotometric Method for Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco Smoke . ANAL. CHEM .
80: 1800-1802 .
Lee BM (1988), Modification of Nicotine to Tar Ratio in Cigarette Smoke . 42nd TOB. CHEM. RES . CONF ., Lexington KY : Paper No . 34 .
Lindsey Al (1939), The Composition of Cigarette Smoke : Studies on Stubs and Tips . BRIT. J. CANCER 13: 195-199 .
Lindsey Al (1962), Some Observations on the Chemistry of Tobacco Smoke . In Jamea 0 and Rosenthal T(Editoa), Tobacco and Health, C .
C . Thomas, Springfield MA : 21-32 .
Lindsey Al, Peraaud K, and Candeli A(1959), Reduction of Benzpyrene in Tobacco Smoke . BRIT . MED. J. 1959 R!) : 821 .
Lionetti C and Carugno N (1976), Gas Chromatognphic Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and in Tobacco Smoke by NSPD Detector .
PROC . 6th INTERNAT . TOB. SCI . CONG ., Tohyo, Jalwu, 1976: 177-178 ; CORESTA INF. BULL ., Spec . Edition 1976 : Paper SO03,
92-93 .
Lipp 0 and van Nooy H(1962), Neue Methoden zur Meaaung der Poeoaitit von Cigarettenpapier und des Ventilationagradea von Cigaretten .
BEITR . TABAKFORSCH . 1 : 369-384.
Lyerly LA (196Sa), Direct Vapor Chromatographic Determination of Menthol, Propylene Qlycol, Nicotine, and Triacetin in Cigarette Smoke .
RDR, 1963, No. 23 (May 5) .
Lyerly LA (196Sb), Direct Vapor Chromatographic Determination of Menthol, Propylene (llycol, Nicotine, and Triacetin in Cigarette Smoke .
19th TOB. CHEM. RES . CONF., Ladngtou KY: Paper No . 14 .
Lyerly LA (1967), Direct Vapor Chromatographic Determination of Menthol, Propylene alycol, Nicotine, and Triacetin in Cigarette Smoke .
TOB . SCI. 11 : 49-51 .
Lyerly LA and Gilleland OH (1966), Pufi by-Puff Analysis of Nicotine and Wet Solida In Cigarette Smoke . RDM, 1966, No. 30 (July 6) .
• Lyerly LA and Greene t3H 41976), Gas Chromatographic Determination of Nicotine in Smoke . RDM, 1976, No . 4 (January 20) .
53
Maeda K, Sawakuri T. Kondo K and Noguchi K (1978), Effect of the Degree of Perforation of Cigarette Paper and Tipping Paper on"the
Performance of Filter Cigarettes . Part 3 . On the Reduction of Tar and Nicotine Delivery . SCI . PAPERS, CENT . RES. INST., JAPAN
MONOPOLY CORP.120: 41 -49.
Malaquin A (1936), La Nicotine dans lea Tabacs et leurs Fum6es . DOUAI (France) 1-78 .
Mann JE Jr, Pederaen PM, Harlow ES, and Downs HD (1964), A Method for Determining Nicotine or Phenol in Cigarette Smoke by Gas
Chrontatogr.phy.18tb TOB. CHEM . RES. CONF., Raleigh NC: Paper No . 34.
Marchand 1 and Zenard 1(1951), Nicotine Content in Cigarette Smoke . PAPETERIE 73: 263-265, 267 .
Maskar9nee MP, Harvey RW, and Caton JE (1978), Rapid Quantitative Determination of Nicotine by High Pressure Liquid Chromatography .
32nd TOB. CHEM . RES. CONF., Montrettt PQ, Canada: Paper No . 51 .
Mathewson DH (1968),7110 Jet Ittqraction Trap : Some Applications in the CoUection and Fncdonation of Tobacco Smoke Aerosols . TOB. SCI .
12 : 41-49 .
Mathur SP (1958), Estimation of Nicotine in Some Common Tobaccos and Smokes . AGRA UNIV . J . RES . 7.• 97-101 .
McConnell WV, Mumpower RC, and Toucy OP (1959), Evaluation of Cigarette Filter Efficiency by Phototluorometry . 13th CHEM . RES.
CONF., Ladngton KY : Paper No. 09 .
McConnell WV, Mumpower RC, and Touey OP (1960), Evaluation of Cigarette Filter Efficiency by Photofluorometry . TOB . SCI . 4.• 56-61 .
McMurtrie A, Utzinger EF, and Wu DT (1981), Cigarette Paper Effects on Tar/Nicotine and CO/Tar Ratios . 35th TOB. CHEM . RES.
CONF., Winston-Salem NC : Paper No . 17 .
McNally WD (1932), The Tar in Cigarette Smoke and Its Possible Effects . AM. J. CANCER 16: 1502-1514 .
Miller LM (1958) . The Case of the Wise Abstainer . 7he Reader's Digest 67-71 (August) .
Miller LM (l%2), Lung Cancer and Cigarettes : Here Are the Latest Findings. 7he Reader's Digest 45-50 (June) .
Miller LM and Monahan J(19S7a), The Facts Behind Filter-T'ip Cigarettes . 71u Reader t Digest 33-39 (July) .
Miller LM and Monahan 1(19S7b), Wanted - and Available - Filter-Tips That Really Filter . 71u Reader s Digest 43-49 (August) .
Miller LM and Monahan 7(19S7c), Canadian Cigarettes: How Do They Rate? 7Jar Reader's Digest 28-29 (September) .
Miller LM and Monahan J(1958a), Nicodne - The Smoker'a Enigma . lJre Reader's Dlgest 25-29 (January) .
Miller LM and Monahan J(1958b), The Cigarette Industry .Changes Its Mind . 7he Reoder's Dlgest 3541 (July) .
Miller IM and Monahan 1(1959), The Search for "Safer" Cigarettea. 7he Reader's Digest 374S (November) .
Miller LM and Monahan J(1%l), Facts We're Not Told About Filter Tips . 7he Reader's Digest 71-78 (July).
Miller LM and Monahan J(1%2), The Cigarette Controversy : A Storm Is Brewing . 7he Reader's Dlgest 91-99 (August) .
Miller LM and Monahan i(1966), To the Cigarette Makers: Just The Facts, Please . 71u Reader's Digest 61-67 (November) .
Miller LM and Monahan 1(1%8), Comimg : Action to Reduce Cigarette Smoking . 7he Reader's Digest 143-148 (December) .
Mitchell RI (1962), Controlled Measurement of Smoke Particle-Retention In the Respiratory Tract . AM. REV. RESP . DIS. 85. 326-532.15
Molinari E(1932), The Influence of Atmospheric Moisture on the Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke . FACHLICHE M1TT. OSTERR .
TABAKREGIE 1932 (2): 4-7.
Monod R and DuPont O(1959), Analyse de Ia Fumde des Cigarettes . Application! la Mesum de 1'Efficacitd des Fiitres . BAUMGARTNER
PAPERS (Swifsedstnd) : 1-29 .
Morgareidge K (1958) . Observations on the Determination of Tot .l Solids in Cigarette Smoke . 12th TOB . CHEM . RES. CONF., Durham
54
NC : Paper No . 09.
Morgareidge K (1959), Evaluation of Variables in Cigarette Smoke Collection and Analysis . I . The Use of a Monitor Sample . 13th TOB .
CHEM. RES. CONF., Lddngton KY: Paper No . 21 .
Mdller R and Moldenhauer W(1967), Studies on the Influence of the Length of Cigarette Filters on Their Efficiency for Absorbing Nicotine,
Anhydrous Smoke Condensate, and Phenols. PROC . 4th INTERNAT. SCI . TOB. CONG., Atbeat, Greece, 1966: 880-885 .
Nagy VL (1932a), Micmdetermination of Nicotine in Tobacco Smoke . BIOCHEM. Z . 249: 404-408 .
Nagy VL (1932b), How Much Nicotine Gets Into Cigarette Smoke? BIOCHEM . Z. 234: 94-96 .
Nagy VL and Diekmann S(1933a), Volumetric Determination of Very Small Amounts of Nicotine . MAGY. GYOG . TARSASAG ERTESIT.
9: 210-2(S .
Nagy VL and Dickmann S (1933b), Volumetric Determination of Very Small Amounts of Nicotine . Z . ANAL . CHEM. 94: 12-l7.
National Cancer Institute (1980), Rtport No . S. Toward l.ess Hazardous GYgaraaus . Summary: Four Skin Palndng Btoassays Using Condensate
from Erperlmental Cgarttus . DHEW Publ. (NIH) (September 1980).
Neurath O(1966), On the Water Contents of Main- and Sidestream Smokea . CORESTA SCI . COMM . MTG ., Lea Rassea, Switserland .
Neurath 0, Ehmke H, and Horstmann H(1964), Influence of Moisture in Tobacco on the Composition of Cigarette Smoke . CORESTA SCi.
COMM. MTG., Vicnaa, AttsWa .
Neurath 0, Ehmke H, and Horatmann H (1964), Eintluw des Feuchtigakeitagehaltea von Cigaretten auf die Zueammeneetzung des Rauches . lII.
BEITR. TABAKFORSCH . 2: 361-369 .
Neurath a, Ehmke H, and Schneemann H (1966), iJber den Wassergehalt von Haupt- und Nebenatromrauch . BEITR . TABAKFORSCH . d:
3S1-3S7 .
Newsome JR and Keith CH (1956), The Effect of Physical Variables on the Weight of Smoke Produced by a Burning Cigarette . 10th TOB .
CHEM. RES. CONF ., Washioatou DC : Paper No . 16.
Newsome JR and Keith CH (1957), Quantitative Studies on Cigareae Smoke .Il . The Effect of Physical Variables on the Weight of Smoke . TOB.
SCI . 1 : 58-63 .
Nicod JD (1963), Toxicite Aigue et Pouvoir Canc6rigbne de Tabaca Pn6extraita . Z . PRXVENTIVMED . 8: 444-454.
Norman V(1973), The Effect of Perforated Tipping Paper on the Yield of Various Smoke Components . 27th TOB. CHEM . RES. CONF.,
Winston-Salem NC: Paper No . 33.
Norman V (1974), The Effect of Perforated Tipping Paper on the Yield of Various Smoke Components . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH . 7.• 282-287 .
Norman V(1982), Changes in Smoke Chemistry of Modem Day Cigarettes . RECENT ADV . TOB . SCI . 8: 141-177.
Norman V, Ihrig AM, Shoffner RA, and Ireland MS (1980a), The Effect of Tip Dilution on the Filtration Efficiency of Upstream and
Downstream Segments of Cigarette Filters . 34th TOB. CHF1W . RES. CONF., Rkhmoud VA : Paper No. 36.
Norman V, Ihrig AM, Shoffner RA, and Ireland MS (1980b), The Effect of Tip Dilution on the Filtration Efficiency of Upstream and
Downstream Segments of Cigarette Filters . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH. INTERNAT . 12:178-185 .
Norr R(1952), Cancer by the Carton . The Reader's Dfgest 7-8 (December) .
Ogg CL (1964), Determination of Particulate Matter and Alkaloids (as Nicotine) in Cigarette Smoke . J . ASSOC . OFF. AGR. CHEM . 47: 356-
362 .
Ogg CL (1969), Determination of Tar and Nicotine in Cigaret Smoke . 23rd TOB. CHEM. RES. CONF., Philadelphia PA : Paper No . 02 .
Ogg CL, Batea WW Jr. Cogbill EC, Blackmore RH, and Petersen EL (1962), Determination of Total Particulate Matur, Nicotine, and Water
in Cigarette Smoke . J. ASSOC. OFF. AGR. CHEM. 45. 540-545 .
55
Ogg CL, Batea WW Jr . Cogbill EC, Harrow LS, and Petersen EL (1960), Determination of Secondary, Tertiary, and Total Alkaloids in
Tobacco . J. ASSOC. OFF. AGR . CHEM . 43: S24S29.
Ogg CL and Schulz EF (1970), Determination of Tar and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . 24th TOB. CHEM . RES. CONF., Montreal PQ,
Canada : Paper No. 13 .
Okada T and Shibayama Y(1964a), Studies on Physical Properties and Filtration of Cigarette Smoke . 1 . Delivery of Water to Particulate and
Oaseoua Phases . SCI . PAPERS, CENT. RES . INST., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP. 106: 151-136.
Okada T and Shibayama Y (1964b), Studies on Physical Properties and Filtration of Cigarette Smoke . Q . Distribution and Amount of Water
and Tar in Mainstream Smoke and Butt . SCI . PAPERS, CENT. RES. INST ., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP.106: 157-162 .
Owen TB (1976) . Tar and Nicotine from U. S . Cigarettes : Trends over the Past Twenty Years . In Wynder EL, Hoffnunn D, and Oori OB
(Editora), Mod{hfng the RJsk for rht Smoker . Proe. 3rd World CoSf on SmoRing and Health, DHEW Pub1. No. (NIH) 76-1221, Vol . 1 : 1-12.
Passey RD, Roe EMF, Middleton FZ, Bergel F, Everett JL . Lewis 011, Martin JB, Boyland E, and Sims P (1954), Cigarette Smoking and
Cancer . BRIT . EMP. CANCER CAMP., ANN. RPT. 32: 60-62 .
Pfyl B (1933a), Zur Bestimmung des Nikotina im Tabakrauch . U. Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM . 66: S01-S 10 .
Pfyl B(1933b), Zur Bestimmung des Nikotina Im Tabakrauch . III . Z . UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM. 66: 510-524 .
Pfyl B and Schmitt CO (1927), Zur Bestimmung des Nikotins Im Tabak und Tabakrauch . Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM. SI: 60-77 .
Piehl DH (1970), Reapiratory Depoaition and Retention of Inhaled Tobacco Smoke In Humans : A Brief Literature Survey . RDR, 1970, No .
S (January 27) .
Pillsbury HC, Bright CC, O'Connor KJ, and Irish FW (1969), Tar and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . J . ASSOC . OFF . ANAL . CHEM. 52:
458-462 .
• Pleaaants SW, Haynes CM, and Harrow LS (1959), A Rapid Spectrophotometrie Determination of Total Nicotine Alkaloids in Tobacco Smoke .
J. ASSOC . OFF. AGR. CHEM. 42: 424-427 .
Popp M (1922), Estimation of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . CHEM. ZTG . 46: 1001-1002 .
Preias W(1934), The Reduction In the Nicotine Content of Smoke by 'Fumawn' Rods . PHARM. ZENTRALHALLE 7S: 501-503 .
Preiu W(1935), Action of Cellulose Filter-Pads in Cigarettes on the Nicotine Content of the Smoke . PHARM. ZENTRALHALLE 76: 313-
316 .
Preiss W (1936), Detemtdnation of Nicotine, Ammonia, Pyridine Bases and Tar in Tobacco Smoke and the Efficiency of Some Filter Tips for
the Absorption of Nicotine . PHARM. ZENTRALHALLE 77.• 437-458.
Pyriki C(1931a), The Occurrence of Nicotine In Cigarette Smoke . Z. ANGEW. CHEM . ZENT . TECH . CHEM . 44: SS3-554 .
Pyriki C(1931b), Ober das AuRtvten von Nikotin im Zigarettennuch . Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM. 62 : 95-99 .
Pyrikl C (1932), Ober das AuRreten von Nikotin im Zigarettenrauch . U . Z . UNTERSUCH. LEBENSM. 64: 263-277.
Pyriki C(1933), Ober das AuRreten von Nikotin im Zigarettenrauch . m . Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM . 6S: 366-371 .
Pyriki C(1934), Ober das Auflreten von Nikotin Im Zigarattenrauch . IV . Z. UNTERSUCH. LEBENSM. 68: 420-431 .
Pyriki C(1935), Ober das Auftreten von Nikotin im Zigarottenrauch . V. Z. UNTERSUCH . LEBENSM . 70: 527-535 .
Pyriki C (1943), Contribution to the Standardization of Nicotine Determination . ACTA NICOTIANA 2 : 116-121 .
Pyriki C and Moldenauer W (1962), Contribution to Nicotine Determination in Mainstream and Sidestream Smoke of Cigarettes . BER. INST.
TABAKFIORSCH . DRESDEN 9• 104-122 .
Pyriki C and Moldenauer W(1963a), On the Determination of the Alkaloids Nicotine and Nondcotine inTobacco and Tobacco Smoke .lst TOB .
SYMP., Plovdiv, Bulgarf4 .-
56
Pyrikl C and Moldensuer W(196Sb), Daa Verhalten von Nikotin und Pyridin bei der Vordestillation zur spectrophotometrischen
Alkaloidbestimmung im Tabakwuch . DIE NAHRUNG 9• 683-689 .
Randolph HR (1973), A Oaa Chrom.tographie Detetmination of Nicotine from an lsopropyl Alcohol Extract of TPM . 27th TOB. CHEM. RES.
CONF., Winaton-Salem NCt Paper No . 19 .
Randolph HR (1974), A(3aa Chromatographic Determination of Nicotine in an Iwpropyl Alcohol Extract of Smoke Particulate Matter . TOB.
SCI . 18: 133-133 .
Ratcliff JD (1959). The Growing Horror of Lung Cancer . ?he Reader's Digest 107-110 (March) .
Rickert WS, Robinson 1C, Young JC, Collishaw N, and Bny DF (1983), PREV. MED. 12: 682-694.
Riis RW (1950), How Harmful Are Cigarettes? 7Ju Reader's Dtgest 1-11 (January) .
Rix CE (1979), N4nston and Marlboro: Effect of Puff Volume, Duration, and Frequency on Nicotine, TPM, Water, 'Tar', Carbon Monoxide,
Puff Number, and Filter EfBciency . RDM, 1979, No . 19 (May 14) .
R . J . Reynolds Tobacco Company (1988), Chemical and Biological ,Studtes on New C(garette Protorypu 71wt 6eat Instead ojBurn Tobacco.
R . J . Reynolds Tobacqo Cbmp~, Winston-Salem NC .
Roberts KC 19705)w, JThe AWutoO-Uma'tic Gas Chromatograph Analysis of Water, Menthol, Phenol, Nicotine and Triacetin in the Ethanol Extract of
Tobacco Smoke Condensate . 29th TOB. CHEM. RES. CONF., CellW Par1c MD: Paper No. 40 .
Rodgman A(196Sa), Smoke Solids and Nicotine . Memorandum to H .H. Ramm, pp . 42 (20 January) .
Rodgman A (1965b), Solids and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke : A Supplement . Memorandum to H .H . Ramm, pp. 4 (20 January) .
Rodgman A(1965e), A Short Explanation and Analysis of Methods of Measuring "Tar and Nicotine" in Cigarette Smoke . Memorandum to
H .H . Ratnm, pp . 17 (January/Febtuary) . Note: DraR document, pp. 10, is dated 22 January .
Rodgman A(1963d), (Possible Witneas for Labeling Hearings ("Tar" and Nicotine)). Memorandum to H .H . Ramm, pp. 2(1 Febnury) .
Rodgman A(1991), A Comparison of the Chemical and Physical Properties of Cigarette Mainstream Smoke (MS), Cigarette Sidestream Smoke
(SS), and Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS). Document submitted to the Env'tronmenW Protectan Agency, December,1991 . Revised version
submitted, June, 1992 .
Rodgman A (1994), The Chemical Composition of Environmental Tobacco Smoke : Some Comments on the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration's Notice on 'Indoor Air Quality .' Document submitted to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 5 August, 1994 .
Roffo AH (1930), Desarrollo de un C .reinome en el Conejo por el Tabaco . BOL. INST. MED. EXPTL . Eb`CUD . CANCER 7.• S01-S38.
Rotlb AH (1931), Durch Tabak beim Kaninchen Entwickles Carcinom. 2. KREBSFORSCH . 33: 321-332 .
Rothwell K and Grant CA (1974), Skvidard Metborlsjor the Malysis ojTobacco Smoke. Research Paper 1 . Second Edition . Tobacco Research
Council, London UK .
Russell MAH (1976), Low Tar, Medium-Nicotina Cigarettes : A New Approach to Safer Smoking . BRIT. MED. J.1976 (I): 1430-1433.
Russell MAH (198(k), Risk-Reduction Achievements and Future Directions . In f)oti OB and Bock FO (Editors), A Safe Qgarrue? Banbury
Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 1SS-177 .
Russell MAH (1980b), The Case for Medium-Nicotine, Low Tar, Low-Carbon Monoxide Cigarettes . In God GB and Bock FG (Editors), A Sqfe
Cigarette? Banbury Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 297-310 .
Russell MAH, Wilson C, Patel UA, Cole PV, and Feyerabend C (1973), Comparison of Effect onTobacco Consumption and Carbon Monoxide
Abdotption of Changing to High and Low Nicotine Cigarettes . BRIT. MED. J.197d (Iv) : S12-S16 .
Sadler W W, Chesson RR, and Schoenbaum AW (1970), Automated Procedure for Determining the Nicotine Content of Steam Distillates . TOB .
SCI. 4.• 208-212 .
• Sato T, Fukuysma T, Suzuki T . Takayanagi 1, and Sakai Y(1961), Difference in Mortality Rate from Lung Cancer between Several Countries
57
Where Cigarettes Are Smoked, and Observations on the Low Humidity of Cigarettes in Winter in Heated Rooms . BULL. INST. PUBL. HLTH .
(Japan) 10: 31-35 .
Schacter S(1978), Pharmacological and Psychological Determinants of Smoking . ANN. INTER. MED. 88: 104.
Scherbak MP, Rice RL, and de Souza JE (1963), An Absolute Method for the Determination of 3,4-Benzpyrene in Cigarette Smoke . 17th TOB .
CHEM. RES. CONF., Montreal PQ, Canada: Paper No . 20.
Schloamann H(1933), The Nicotine Content in the Smoke of Cigarettes Containing Low-Nicotine, Nicotine-Detoxified, and Nicotine-Free
Tobaccos . KLIN. WCHNSCHR. 12: 1255-1258.
Schmihl D (1955), Fluoreazenwntetsuchungenand Ziganttenuch. Z. AEROSOL . FORSCH . THERAP. 4.• 1-11 .
Schmihl D, Consbtuch U, and Dtuckny H . (1954), Fluonazenzmessungen an Zigarettennuch . ARZNEIMITTELFORSCH . 4: 71-75 .
Schmihl D and Schneider H(1933), Abnahme der Fluoreszenzintensitiit von Zigarettennuch nach Lichteinwirkung .
ARZNEIMITTELFORSCH . S: 348-330 .
Schmidt F(1904), The Nicotine Content of Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . Thesia, Wurzburg Uni .etsity : 1-46 .
Schultz FJ and Spears AW (1966), Determination of Moisture in Total Particulate Matter . TOB. SCI . 10: 75-76 .
Schulz W and Seehofer F (1973), Ober den Einfluu von Abnuchpanmatern auf die Rauchausbeuten . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH . 7.• 105-110.
Schur MO and Rickards IC (l9SS), The Design and Operation of a Multiple Smoking Machine . 9th TOB. CHEM. RES . CONF., Raleigh NC:
Paper No . 21 .
Schur MO and Rickards JC (1937), Design and Operation of a Multiple Smoking Machine . TOB . SCI . 1: 13-20.
Schurch 0 and Wintentein A(1935), Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Frage Tabak und Krebs . Z. KREBSFORSCH . 42: 76-92.
Seehofer F and Borowski H(1963), Eine Wasserdampf-Destillationsapparatus zur Nikotinbe .timmung In Tabak und Rauchkondenuten sowie
zur Oesamtastiekstoftbestimmung . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH . 2: 37-38.
Segelken D, Scroder R, and Seehofer F(1962(, The Effect of Number of Puffs and Puff Serial Number on Cigarette Smoke Condensate .
TABAK TECH . HAMBURG TECH .WISSENSCHAFT. SCHRIFFTENREIHE 1962 : 1-7 .
Senkus M (1964), Solids and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . (10 Febnury) .
Shoffner RA and Ireland MS (1980), Rapid Analysis of Menthol and Nicotine in Smoke and the Effects of Air Dilution on Delivery . 34th TOB.
CHEM. RES. CONF., Rkhmond VA: Paper No . 19.
Shoffner RA and Inland MS (1982), Rapid Analysis of Menthol and Nicotine In Smoke and the Effects of Air Dilution on Delivery . TOB . SCI .
26: 109-112.
Shotadze DP (1953), Expetitnental Investigation of the Carcinogenic Influence of Tar . VOPROSY ONKOL . 6: 90-93 .
Sloan CH d Curran Ja (1981), Spectrotomettic Determination of Filter Efficiency of Cigarette Filten . TOB . SCI. 25 : 57-60 .
Sloan CH and Sublett BJ (1964), Moisture Content of the Particulate Phase of Smoke from F'ilter and Nonfilter Ciganttes . 18th TOB. CHEM .
RES. CONF., Raleigh NC : Paper No . 20 .
Sloan CH and Sublett BJ (1965), Moisture Content of the Particulate Phase of Smoke from Filter and Non8lter Ciganttes . TOB . SCi . 9: 70-74 .
Smit H (1972), A Direct Method for the Spectrophotometric Determination of Smoke Condensate Retention by Filten of Cigarettes . JOINT
CORESTAITCRC CONF ., WOliatnsbury VA, CORESTA INF. BULL., Spec . Editioa 1972 :11411S .
Smith RR and De Souzt JE (1963), A Colorimetrio Method for the Detennination of Filtntion Efficieney .17th TOB . CHEM . RES. CONF.,
Montreal PQ: Paper No. 21 .
Staberg E(1939), Tar and Nicotine Content of Cigarette Smoke . NORD. HYG. TIDSKR . 40. 71-88.
58
Staberg E (1960), Content of Tar and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . Comparison Between Different Cigarette Brands and Studies of the Effect
of Duration and Mode of Smoking . NORD. HYG. TIDSKR . 41 : 199-216.
Staub M and Furrer H (1957), Tobacco Investigations . V . The Reproducibility of Smoke Investigations . MITT . GEBIETE LEBENSM . HYG.
48: 94116.
Taki S(1937), The Cancerogenic Activity of Substances Isolated from Tobacco Tar . OSAKA IGAKII ZASSI 36: 483-484 . Cited by Kinosit.
R (1937), Speciai Report : Studies on Cancerogenic Chemical Substances . TRANS. JAPAN SOC. PATH . 27: 665-727.
Theodorovits I(1905), The Nicotine Content of the Smoke of Different Tobacco Products . MAGYAR . DOHANY . (Budapest) Ugust 1 : 5 ;
August 16 : 2-3 ; September 1 : 2-3 ; September 16 : 2-3 ; October 1 : 2-3 .
Thomas CE (1980), Automated Method for FTC Tar of Low Delivery Cigarettes Based upon Fluorescence of TPM Extracts . TOB. SCI. 24.•
64-68 .
Thome FA (1965a), Gas Chromatographic Determination of Water in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke and Total Particulate Matter . RDR, 1965,
No. 18 (April 1).
Thome FA (1965b), Gas Chromatographic Determination of Water in Cigarette Mainstream Smoke and Total Particulate Matter . 19th TOB.
CHEM . RES . CONP., Ladngton KYt Paper No . 33 .
Thome PA (1966), Gas Chromatographic Determination of Water In Cigarette Mainstream Smoke and Total Particulate Matter . TOB . SCI. 10:
S 1-34 .
Tillmanns H (1880), tlber Teer, Russ und Tabakkrebs . DEUT. Z. CHIR. 13: 319-1535 .
Tokura C amd Furakawa Y (1964), Nicotine and Tar in Cigarette Smoke . Collection EtBciency of the Cambridge Filter for Nicotine and Tar.
SCi . PAPERS, CENT . RES. INST., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP.10i6: 289-293 .
Toole E(1933), The Poluimetrie Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke. Z. ANAL . CHEM. 93: 188-194 .
Toth J(1908), The Free Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke . KISERLETUGYI KOSLEMENYEK 11 : 520-323 .
Toth J(1909), The Free Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke . CHEM. ZTG . 33: 866-867 .
Toth I and Knmpera J(1910), Data on the Amount of Ammonia, Pyridine Bases, and Nicotine in Tobacco Smoke . KISERLETUGYI
KOSLFIVIENYEK /3: 617-622 .
Trifu IS and Dumitrescu M(19S8a), Tar and Nicotine Content of Cigarettes . Bulgarian Cigarettes Are Least Harmful . BULGAR. TYUTYUN
3: 520-325 .
Trifu IS and Dumitrescu M(1958b), The Tars and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . REV . INTERNAT . TABACS 33: 27, 29-30.
Trifu IS and Dumitreacu M(1959), The Tar Content of Tobacco Mainstream Smoke . PROC . 2nd INTERNAT. TOB. SCI . CONG ., Brwaels,
Belgium, 1959: 374-578 .
Uhlmann W(1963), Statistical Remarks on the Research of IL Nicod on the Carcinogenic Effects of Pre-Extracted Tobacco . Z.
PRXVENTIVMED. & 140-144.
United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1964), Sbwbtng ard HealrlY . Report oJthe Advisory Conuntaee to the Surgeon General ojrhe
Public Health Service. DHEW Publ . No. (PHS) 1103 .
United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1979), Smoking and Health . A Report ojthe Surgeon General . DHEW Publ. No. (PHS) 79-
50066.
United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1981),11u Health Consequences oJSmoking. 7he Uwnging GYgoreae . A Report ojthe Surgeon
General. DHHS Publ. No. (PHS) 81-S01S6.
United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1982), 7be Heatrh Consequences ojSmoldng . Cancer. A Report ojthe Surgeon General . DHHS
Publ. No . (PHS) 82-50179.
Van Duuren BL, Bilbao JA, and Joseph CA (1960a), The Origin and Nature of the Nitrogen Heterocyclics in Cigarette Smoke Condensate .
59
PROC . AM. CHEM. SOC . MTG .-IN-MINIATURE, New York NY .
Van Duuren BL, Bilbao JA, and Joseph CA (1960b), The Carcinogenic Nitrogen Heterocyclee in Cigarette Smoke Condensate . J . NATL .
CANCER INST . 25. 33-6 1 .
Van Lseuaen WS (1919), On the Nicotine Content of the Smoke of Strong, Mild and Nicotine-Free Cigars . ARCH. EXPTL. PATHOL.
PHARMACOL. 84. 282-316 .
Verband der Cigantten-Jnduatrie, Wiaeenaehaftliche Fonehung .teUe (1963), Binheitliehe Vorschriften Rk die Analyse von Tabak und
Tabakrauch . 4 . Vorschrift tOr die Bestimmung des Nikotins itn Tabak, im Tabaknuch-kondeneat und in Filtern . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH .
3: 87-89 .
ViaR P (1969), Comparaiaon des Machines I Fumer Phippa and Bird et Cigarette Components . PiBge 1`•Jectratadque et Filtre Cambridge . ANN.
DIR . ETUDES 9QUIPEMENT, SEITA 7(Secr . 1): l 13-119 .
Wacker L and Schminke A(1911), Experimentelle Untersuchunger zur Kauaelem Genese atypiacher Epithelwucheningen. MVNCH . MED .
WCHNSCHR. 58: 1607-1613, 1680-1682 .
Wagner JR and Thaggard NA (1974), An Automated Method for the Gaa Chromatographic Determination of Nicotine in Smoke . TOB. SCI.
18: 63-0 .
Wagner JR and Thaggard NA (1979), aaa-Uquid Chromatognphic Determination of Nicotine Contained on Cambridge Filter Pads . J. ASSOC .
OFF. ANAL.CHEM . 62: 229-236 .
Wagner JR, Thaggard NA, and Thompson WC (1977), DetermInation of Nicotine Contained on Cambridge Filter Pads . 31st TOB. CHEM.
RES. CONF., Greensboro NC : Paper No . 42 .
Wakeh.m H (1976), Sales Weighted Average Tar and Nicotine Deliveries of U.S . Cigarettea from 1957 to the Present. In Wynder EL and Hecht
SS (Editors), Lung Cancer, UICC TECH . RPT. SERIES 23: 151-152.
Wald N, Doll R . and Copeland t7 (1981), Trends In Tar, Nicotine, and Carbon Monoxide Yields of UK Cigarettes Manufactund since 1934 .
BRIT. MED. J . 2820 763-765.
Waltz P and HIIuaermann M (1963), Modem Filter Cigarettes and Their Effects on Smoking Habits and Inhaled Substances . Z.
PRAVENTIVMED. 8: 73-98 .
Waltz P, Hiuaermann M, and Moser F(1963), Bestimmung des im Rauchkondenat enthaltenes Wauen durch Spektrophotometrie im nahen
Infnrot . BEITR . TABAKFORSCH . 2 : 39-50.
Waltz P, Hiweemann M, and Nyari S(1959), Photometric Determination of Nicotine in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . MITT . GEBIET.
LEBENSM. HYG . $0. 159-165 .
Watburg H (1906), Studies on the Nicotine and Pyeidine Content of Tobacco Smoke by Use of Strong and Mild as Well as 'Nicotine-Free' and
'Nicodne-Hatmful' Cigars. Theejs, Wur:bttr8 University : 1-38.
Wartman WB Jr, Cogbill EC, and Harlow ES (1959), Determination of Particulate Matter in Concentrated Aerosols . ANAL . CHEM. 31 : 1705-
1709 .
Wartntan WE Jr and Harlow ES (1958), The Determination of Total Solids, Tan and Resins, and Nicotine in Cigarette Smoke . 133rd NATL .
MTG., AM. CHEM . SOC ., San Francieeo CA.
Watson DC, Hate RW, and Randolph HR (1970), Automation of the Gas Chromatographic Analysis of Water in Smoke Particulate Matter . J .
CHROMAT. SCI. 8: 143-146.
Watson WL (1954), PENNSYLVANIA MED . J. 1954: 735-736.
Wenuach A(1928), Nicotine Content of Tobacco Smoke and Nicotine Uptake in the Human Mechanism from the Mainstream Smoke .
FACHLICHE MITT. OSTERR. TABAKREGIE 1928 (3) : 8-11 .
Wenuach A(193Ia), Contribution to the Detennination of Nicotine in Smoke . i . FACHLICHE MITT. OSTERR . TABAKREGIE 1931 (1) :
1-8 . _
60
Wenusch A(1931b), Contribution to the Determination of Nicotine in Smoke . II. FACHLICHE MITT . OSTERR . TABAKREGIE 1931(R):
1-3 .
Wenusch A(1934a), Deterntin .Uon of Nicotine in Tobacco Smoke . BIOCHEM. Z. 271: 280-284 .
Wenusch A (1934b), Ober die VetteitunY des Nikotins beim Rauchen von Zigaretten . CHEM. ZEIT. 58: 206-207 .
Wenusch A (1934c), Ober die Vetteilung des Nikotins beim Rauchen von ZiYaretten . CHEM. ZEIT . $8. 310.
Wenuaeh A (1934d), Ober die Vetteiluny des Nikotina beim Rauchen von ZiYaretten . CHEM. ZEIT . $8. 543.
Wenusch A(1934e), Theoretical Buis for Infornution on the Nicotine Distribution In Cigarette Smoking . Z. UNTERSUCH. LEBENSM. 68:
412-420 .
Wenusch A(1936a), The Nicotine Content of the Mainstream Smoke of Thick and Thin Cigarettes . Z . UNTERSUCH . LEBENbM. 72: 213-
218 .
Wenusch A (1936b), Determination of Nicotine In Tobacco Smoke . PHARM. ZENTRALHALLE 77 : 645-646 .
Wenusch A(1937a), The Determination of Nicotine In Tobacco Smoke . Z . UNTERSUCH. LEBENSM . 74: 46-51 .
Wenusch A(1937b), The Influence of Cut Width on the Passage of Nicotine into Mainstream Smoke . Z . UNTERSUCH. LEBENSM. 73: 182-
184.
Whisnant CC and Stevenson SL (1969a), Smoke Inhalation Studies . 1. Compariwn of Human Puff Profiles to the Puff Profile Generated by the
Filamadc Smoking Machine . RDR, 1969, No. 19 (June 16) .
Whisnant CC and Stevenson SL (1969b), Smoke Inhalation Studies . II. The Effect of Flow Rate on the Efficiency of Estron and Multjjet Filters .
RDR, 1969, No. 20 (June 16) .
Whisnant CC and Stevenson SL (1969e), Smoke Inhalation Studies . lII . A Preliminary Study of the Deposition of Particulate Matter in Human
Smokers Using WINSTON-Filtered Cigarettes . RDR,1969, No. 23 (June 24) .
Whisnant CC and Stevenson SL (1969d), Smoke Inhalation Studies. iV. The Deposition of Particulate Matter in Human Smokers - A
Comparison of the WINSTON and Muldjet Filters . RDR, 1969, No. 24 (June 24).
Williamson RE, Chaplin JF, and McClure WF (1986a), Near-Infrared Spectrometry of Tobacco Leaf for Estimating Tar Yield of Smoke . 40th
TOB . CHEM. RES. CONF., Knox .iBe TN: Paper No. 49.
Williamson RE, Chaplin JF, and McClure WF (1986b), Near-Infrared Spectrometry of Tobacco Leaf for Estimating Total Particulate Matter
Yield of Smoke . CORESTA 1956 SYMP., Taormina, Ita(y, CORESTA INF. BULL., Spec. Editbu 1986: Paper ST13, 107-108 .
Wiliiamson RE, Chaplin IF, and Spurr RW (1975) . Chemicd Analysis of Tobaccos Varying in Tar and Nicotine Content . 29th TOB. CHEM.
RES . CONF., CoBtge Puit MDt Paper No. 14 .
Willits CO, Swain ML, ConneUy JA, and Brice BA (1950), Spectrophotometric Determination of Nicotine . ANAL. CHEM . 22 : 430-433 .
Wintentein A and Aronson R(1928), Contcibution to the Knowledge of Tobacco Uses . Part II. On the Distribution of Nicotine in Tobacco
Smoking . Z. HYG. INFEKTIONSKRANK.108: S30-S33 .
Wolman W (1953), A Study of Cigarettes, Cigarette Smoke, and Filters . I . Filter-Tip Cigarettes. J. AM . MED. ASSOC . 112: 917-920 .
Wulfert K(1934a), The Determination of Nicotine In the Smoke of Norwegian and Foroigt Tobaccos . TIDSSKR . IC.IIIVQ, Beriveseu 14 : 128-
131 .
Wuifert K (1934b), The Determination of Nicotine In the Smoke of Norwegian and ForeignTobaccos . TIDSSKR . K,1El1II, BerQveaen 14 : 140-
143 .
Wynder EL (1961), Laboratory Contributions to the Tobaceo-Cancer Problem . ACTA MED . SCAND. 170 (Suppl. 369): 63-101 .
Wynder EL (1980), Some Concepts of the Less Harmful Cigarette. In ()ori aB and Bock FO (Editors), A Sqfe Clgarcruf Banbury Report 3,
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 3-12 .
61
Wynder EL, Gnham EA, and Croninger AB (1953a), Study on the Experimental Production of Cancer with Tobacco Tar . PROC. AM. ASSOC .
CANCER RES. 1 : 62-63 .
Wynder EL, Graham BA, and Croninger AB (1953b), Experimental Production of Carcinoma with Cigarette Tar . CANCER RES. 13:855-864.
Wynder EL, Graham EA, and Croninger AB (1955), Ezperimental Production of Carcinoma with Cigarette Tar . II . Tests with Different Mouse
Strains . CANCER RES.1S: 445-448 .
Wynder EL and Hott'mann D (1960), Some Practical Aspects of the Smoking-Cancer Problem . NEW ENG. J. MED. 262: S40-S4S .
Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1962a), A Study of Air Pollution Carcinogenesis . III. Carcinogenic Activity of Gasoline Engine Exhaust
Condensate. CANCER 1S.• 103-108 .
Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1%1), Present Status of Laboratory Studies onTobacco Carcinogenesis . ACTA PATH . MICROBIOL. SCAND .
32:119-132.
Wynder EL and Hoffimnn D(1%2b), Studies with the Gaseous and Particulate Phase of Tobacco Smoke . PROC . AM . ASSOC . CANCER
RES. 3 (4): 373 .
Wynder EL and Hoffinenn D(1%3), Ein experimenteller Beitrag zur Tabakrauchkanzerogenese . DEUT. MED . WCHNSCHR. 88: 623-628 .
Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1964), Experimental Tobacco Carcinogeneais . ADV. CANCER RES . 8: 249-433 .
Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1965), Reduction of Tumorigenicity of Cigarette Smoke . An Experimental Approach . J . AM. MED. ASSOC .
192: 88-94.
Wynder EL and Hoffinann D (1967), Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke : Sdrdfes In F.xperimental Carrlnogenesls . Academic Press, New York NY .
Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(Editon) (1%8), Toward a Less KanMu! Cigarette . NATL. CANCER INST. MONOGRAPH 28.
Wynder EL, Kopf P, and Ziegler H(19S7a), Dose Response with Cigarette Tar. PROC . AM. ASSOC. CANCER RES. 2 (3): 261 .
Wynder EL, Kopf P, and Ziegler H(19S7b), A Study of Tobacco Carcinogenesia . II. Dose-Response Studies. CANCER 10: 1193-1200 .
Wynder EL, Lupberger A, and Grener C(1956), Experimental Production of Cancerwith Cigarette Tar : Strain Differences . BRIT . J . CANCER
10.• 307-309 .
Wynder EL and Wright OF (1957), A Study of Tobacco Carcinogenesis . I. The Primary Fractions . CANCER 10: 235-271 .
Wynder EL, Wright OF, and Latn J(1939), A Study of Tobacco Carcinogenesis. VI . The Role of Precursors . CANCER 12: 1073-1078 .
Yamagiwa K(1965), CoJkcred Papers on AN(Jkfa! Producdon ojConcsr . Maruzen Company Ltd ., Tokyo, Japan .
Yamagiwa K and Ichikawa K (1915), ExperimenteUe Studio Ober die Pathogenese der Epithelialgeschw6late . I . TOKYO IGAKKAI ZASSI
13: 295-344 .
Yamagiwa K and Icldkawa K(1917), Experimentelle Studio 8ber die Pathogeneae der Epitheliaigeschw0late . II. TOKYO IGAKKAI ZASSI
17.• 19-67 .
Yamagiwa K and Ichikawa K(1918a), Experinantelle Studie Ober die Pathogeneae der F.pitheliaigeschw8late . lII. TOKYO IGAKKAI ZASSI
19: 483-493 .
Yamagiwa K and Ichikawa (

K 1918b),
,~.,ì~,t"~:
" "' .~ J. CANCER RES. d: W
Yamamoto T(1981), Butt Retention of Tan and Nicotine . SCI. PAPERS, CENT. RES. INST., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP . 123 :125-130.
Yamamoto T, Anzai U, and'Okada T (1984), Effect of Cigarette Circumference on Weight Loss during Puffs and Total Delivery of Tar and
Nicotine . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH . INTERNAT .12: 259-269 .
Yamamoto T, Umemura S, and Kaneko H(1990), Effect of Exogenous Potassium on the Reduction in Tar . Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide
Deliveries in the Mainstream Smoke of Cigarettes . BEITR. TABAKFORSCH. INTERNAT. 1I: 379-385 .
62
Yamazaki M, Tom9muro R, and Miteuhuhi K(1963), Relation between Stalk Position of Tobacco Leaf and Nicotine and Tar Contents in Its
Smoke. SCI . PAPERS, CENT. RES. INST., JAPAN MONOPOLY CORP. J07.• 193-196 .
63
DRAFT • January 22, 1965
A Short Explanation and Analysis of Methods of Measuring

"Tar and Nicotine" in Cigarette Smoke
Introduction
. Suggestions have been made from time to time that
cigarette packages-should indicate the amount of "tar
and nicotine" produced by the smoking of the cigarettes
in the package . Even if it were established that "tar
and nicotine" have some relationship to health, there is
no method by which a smoker can be accurately informed of
either the amount or the composition of the "tar and
nicotine" he receives from the cigarettes he smokes .
The term "tar and nicotine" requires clarification .
Cigarette smoke consists of the particulate phase and the
gas phase . The particulate phase has been referred to in
scientific and other literature by,a variety of terms, such
as tars, smoke solids, solids, total solids, particulate
matter, total particulate matter, smoke condensate, total
smoke condensate and smoke condensables . one of the components
of smoke solids is nicotine ; the nicotine fraction of smoke
solids is sometimes referred to as alkaloids, or total
alkaloids . It .,seems more meaningful to use the term "total

solids" instead of "tar", and such term will be used in this
memorandum .
w
N
r
~
. .._... ..~. .~ ..._ ...~. _ ..._ . . . . . . . . ., ___. ..~. .. . . ..._ . , • .• _-

-2-
Suand-Conclusion
Various methods exist for determining in the laboratory
the total solids and the nicotine in the smoke of cigarettes
smoked by a machine under laboratory conditions . Although
the different methods produce different results, one method
could be arb_itrarily
. selected as the standard . But the
total solids and nicotine received by any individual smoker
would vary from that produced by the smoking machine in the
laboratory using the same brand of cigarettes, even if it
be assumed that the cigarettes smoked by the individual and
those smoked in the laboratory are exactly alike . This is
because the smoking habits of individuals vary, and because
the conditions under which cigarettes are smoked vary .
.It may not be assumed, however, that cigarettes smoked
by the smoking machine in the laboratory are the same as the
cigarettes of the same brand purchased by the smoker . Because
of unavoidable variations in the manufacture and storage of
cigarettes, differences exist in the tobacco, paper, filter
and condition of cigarettes so that measurements of total

I•
solids and nicotine in the smoke of one sample of cigarettes
will differ from measurements obtained with another sample
of the same brand, assuming that all possible steps are taken
• -3-
to assure as much uniformity as possible . The measurements
appearing on a package of cigarettes would relate to the
cigarettes used iii the test, and would not be accurate as
applied to the cigarettes contained in the package .
Even if two cigarettes of the same brand, or of two
different brands, were to deliver precisely the same amount
of total solids, variations in the cigarettes, in smoking
habits and in smoking conditions would generate total solids
in the smoke of one of the cigarettes composed of different
quantities and kinds of chemical compounds from those
found in the total solids from the other cigarette . Since
it is not known which, if any, chemical compound in the
total solids is harmful, it is not helpfuli to the smoker to
furnish him a quantitative measurement of total solids,
especially one which, as has been stated in the two preceding
paragraphs, cannot be accurate .
The conclusion is therefore inescapable that labeling
•the amount of "tar and nicotine" on a cigarette package
cannot give to the smoker meaningful information as to the
amount or composition of the total solids an$ nicotine he
receives from the cigarettes he smokes . He is more likely
to be misled than informed .
_ . .... .. .~. .. ...._....-...~.,.,...~_ ......... .. .... ....r.~.. .. .. . . .. ;~ ...__.__ . ..._ .__.__._ .. . .. .. .r. .~_ , _ . .
Methods for Measuring Total Solids and Nicotine
The following five methods for measuring total
solids and nicotine are described in Appendix A hereto :
the Wolman method ; the Consumer's Union method - No . I ;
the Cambridge Filter method ; the Foster D . Snell method ;
and the Liggett & Myers Tobacco Company method . It •
should be recognized that a number of variations of such
methods are possible, and there-may be other methods .
Those described in Appendix A, however, appear to be the
ones most commonly reported in the scientific literature .
The five methods described in Appendix A have not
been compared on the same lot of cigarettes . Three of
the methods, however, have been compared by Keith & Newsome
(Tobacco Science II, 14-19 (1958)) . The results of such
comparison show distinct variations, and were reported to
be as follows :
Consumer's Union Foster D . Snell Liggett and Myers

Method - No . 1 Method Tobacco Co . Method
Solids, mg ./cig . 18 .8 34 .2 19 .1
Ln
~
Nicotine , mg ./cig . 2 .2 2 .9 3 .5 ~
~
m
It is of course clear even apart from such comparisons that ~
~
N
the various methods, described in Appendix A necessarily LA
will produce different results, because they do not start N

O
-, .
-S-
with the same smoking conditions .
Generally speaking each of the methods requires from
five to ten cigarettes [query, Liggett & Myers method?]
for testing purposes . The cigarettes are smoked by a
machine, which is designed to retain 1007. of the particulate
phase of the smoke . Each method proceeds on the basis of
smoking the cigarettes using a fixed volume of puff, a puff
of a specific :duration, a fixed frequency of puffing, and
a specific amount of the cigarette to be smoked . All methods
other than that of Liggett & Myers use a 35 ml . volume-of
puff . The most common duration of puff is two seconds, and
the most common frequency of puff is one per minute . The
Wolman method and the Cambridge Filter method smoke a fixed
length of cigarette (47 mm .), regardless of the length of
the cigarette being smoked and regardless of whether it
is a filter cigarette or not . Some of the methods smoke to
a predetermined butt length, for example, 23 mm . ; in such
methods the length of cigarette smoked would vary depending
upon the initia7l length of the cigarette being tested and
whether or not it is a filter cigarette . The Liggett & Myers
method smokes fourteen puffs of each cigarette, fo that the
number of puffs taken determines the length of the cigarette
smoked .
-6-
From the foregoing it is apparent that each of the
methods has adopted arbitrary smoking habits for the smoking
machine, which habits .do not correspond with the habits of
each individual smoker . The volume of puff taken in smoking
a cigarette, the frequency of puffs, and the duration of
the puff vary among individuals . The lengths of cigarettes
smoked, or the butt length to which cigarettes are smoked

:- -
also varies among smokers . These variations necessarily
means that the amount of total solids and nicotine collected
by the smoking machine is not the same as what the individual
smoker receives .
It is obvious of course that all smokers do not take
in, or retain, 100% of the particulate phase, as a smoking
machine is designed to do . The degree of inhalation differs
appreciably among individuals . Moreover, smokers who inhale
hold the smoke in the lungs for different times, some exhaling
more quickly than others . The amount of the particulate
phase retained in the lungs obviously depends in part upon
the time elapsing between inhaling and exhaling . Smokers
who do not inhale admit the smoke to their mouths ; the duration
of reteption of the particulate phase in their mouths obviously

0
determines the extent of retention of solids . o
r
Other variations between smokers include the following : w
N
U
O
! ; 51710 4927
the burning temperature of cigarettes varies from smoker
to smoker because of differences in smoking habits ; the
pressure dro,p across a cigarette differs from smoker to
smoker ; and the total number of puffs per cigarette and
the time necessary to consume a cigarette varies from
smoker to smoker .
Successive puffs of an individual on the same cigarette
may differ with respect to puff volume, puff duration, degree
of inhalation, temperature change by puffing, and pressure
drop produced by puffing . The manner of smoking successive
cigarettes by an individual may also differ with respect
to number of puffs per minute, length of cigarette consumed,
total number of puffs per cigarette and time required to
consume a cigarette .
All of the variations so far mentioned have been the
subject of comment in the scientific literature, and all
Would affect the amount of total solids and nicotine received
by the individual smoker as compared with a smoking machine .
In addition, there are other variable factors, which have
not been reported in the scientific literature, and which
may affect the amount or composition of total so~lids and
nicotine delivered to or retained by a smoker . Some of

these factors are :
,
a. Smoking at very low temperatures and very low

humidity . These conditions would prevail in
the winter in the northern states .
b . Smoking at reduced pressures, for example in the

mountainous states . There is some indication
that the rate of burning of a cigarette will
differ depending upon the altitude at which the
cigarette is smoked .
c . Smoking in areas which are either abnormally

humid or abnormally dry .
d . Smoking from a pack which has been open for'more

than a day . The cigarettes may lose appreciable
moisture under arid conditions . Although loss of
moisture will not affect weight of solids produced
per cigarette, it is believed to affect the
chemical composition of smoke .
Variations in Cigarette s
The following variables affect the yield of total
solids per gram of tobacco product consumed :
a . Tobacco . Since tobacco is an agricultural

commodity, it is not homogeneous . Its
characteristics vary from leaf to leaf of
the same plant, and within the same leaf .
And of course a variety of types and grades
of tobacco are used in the manufacture of
cigarettes, such as flue-cured, Burley and
Turkish tobaccos .
b . Filtration and pressure drop . The h ;gher the

degree of filtration, the lower the total
solids ; and the higher the pressure drop, the
lower the total solids . The efficiency of
filters of the same design will vary from
filter to filter depending upon the construction
or the manner in which the filter tow is packed .
.. . _ . . _ . . _..._.~ ..,.. ._..-. __ ~ . --- . ••- .~.-. _~, _,.. .. . . . .. . .. _ ... ~.. .
\
~J .
-9-
c . Paper porosity . The solids usually decrease

,as the porosity increases .
d . Number of puffs taken to consume a given length

of cigaz'ette . For example, Burley tobacco burns
at a greater rate than other tobacco types ; and
thus, a different number of puffs are required
to consume the same cigarette length of Burley,
flue-cured, and Turkish tobaccos .
e . Humidity of analytical laboratory .
f . Moisture content of cigarettes . The age of the

cigarettes (e .g .•, the length of time on the
retailer's shelf) may affect the moisture
content . Moreover it is not possible to
manufacture cigarettes with a constant moisture
_ content .
g . Variations in amounts of total solids and/or

nicotine in each puff . It has been suggested in
the scientific literature that the amount and
composition of total solids in later puffs markedly
expeeds that in earlier puffs ; others report
finding very little difference between the amounts
in the early and late puffs .
h . Number of cuts/inch . With the same tobacco type

or blend, increasing the number of cuts per
inch of tobacco in the manufacturing process
decreases the total solids in the smoke, and
changes their composition .
i . Additives on the a er and/or the tobacco can

elter the amount of smoke solids and or nicotine .
Additives include flavoring materials .
Of course some of the above mentioned variables are
interdependent, e .g ., filtration, paper porosity, cuts/ inch
of tobacco, and pressure drop .
. . . .._ . . . .- .~--• . .- ..._.. . . .._ . . . . . . .. . . .~ _ . . . .. . . .,. . . . . . . . . .. .~_ .. ..~ . . . . . . . . . ._ . .. . . . .... . .~ ... ..... . ~ .. .
-9A-
It should be emphasized that variations between
cigarettes exist between practically all cigarettes . That
is to say, cigarettes manufactured at the same time, from
the same tobacco and other materials, will show many of
the variations described, and would on testing generate
total solids of different amounts and composition . This
is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that the five
test methods d'escribed in Appendix A all produce an average
reading for all the cigarettes tested, rather than a reading

for each cigarette .
1.
~. :
-10-
Changes in ~
the Composition of Smoke and Total Solids
It has been pointed out that the amount of total
solids and nicotine produced by smoking can be changed
by a large number of variable factors, including the type
of tobacco, the efficiency of the filter, and the porosity
of the cigarette paper . As has been mentioned in connection
with some of the factors named, they (and others) may also
change the ratios of the various components of the smoke .
As a result, although the amount of total solids may remain
the same or be reduced, the ratios of the components in
the smoke might be different .
.,
t.
.. .~ .~ ..r« . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .~.~ .~. . . .~ . ... .~ . . .- . . . ~ . ~. .. . . . . . .

. - ..- .... . .~
A Short Explanation and Analysis of Methods of Neuuring
"Tar and Nicotine" in Cia .,rette Ss+oke ~. .~.~.~ ..~
y
Int~.i.°o .
Suggestions have been rade from time to time that cigarette
packages"should indicate the amunt of "tar and nicotine" produced
by the emoking of the cigarettes in the package . Even if it were
established that "tar and nicotine" have some relationship to
health, there is no method by which a smoker caa be sccuratelr
informedof either the snunt or the compositioa of the "tar and
nicotine" he receives from the cigarettes he ssiokea .

S The term "tar and nicotine" requires clarification . Cigarette
smoke consists of the particulate phase and the gas phue . The
particulate phase has been referred te•in scientific and other
literature by a variety of terrs, such ai .tars, saoke solids, solids,
total solids, particulate oatter,'total particulate nttter, snoke
condensate, total sooke condensate aad smoke coadensables . One of
the components of smoke solids xs jicotinei the nicotine fraction
of smoke solids is somsti .es referred'to u alkaloids, or total
alkaloids . It seems more meaningful to use the ters "total solids"
instead of "tar", 4nd such term vill be used ta this sswrandum .

f
dumaa~ and Conclusion
Yariou& methods exist for determining to the laboratory
the total solids end the nicotine in the ss+oke of cigar .ttes ssioked
by a machine under laboratory conditions . Although the different
.ethods produce different results, one method could be arbitrarily
selected a1 the standard . but the total solids and nicotine received
by any individual smoker would vary from that produced by the
ss,dcing machine in the laboratory using the sam brand of cigarettes,
even if it be assumed that the cigarettes smoked by the individual
and those smoked in the laboratory are exactly alike . This is
because the smoking habits of individuals vary, and because the
conditionsr under which cigarettes are smoked vary .
It may not be assumed, however, that cigarettes smoked by the
smoking machine in the laboratory are the sa .ro as the cigarettes
of the same brand purchased by the smoker . Because of unavoidable
variations in the manufacture and storage of cigarettes, differences
exist in the tobacco, paper, filter and condition of cigarettes so
that measurements of total solida and nicotine in the ssioke of ms
sample of cigarettes will differ from measurements obtained vitb
another sample of the same brand, assuming that all possible steps "
are taken to assure as eauch uniformity as possible . Zbe measure .ents
appearing on a package of cigarettes would relate to the cigarettes
used in the test, and would not be accurate as applied to the

cigarettes contained in the package .
Even if two cigarettes of the saoe brand, or of two different
brands, were to deliver preaisely the aase aount of total solids,

,`
variations in the .eigarettes, in smoking habits and in s .oicins oonditions
would generate total solids in the a.oke of oae of the cigarettes
composed of different quantities and kinds of chemical compounds from
those fouad_ia the total solids fro* the othsr cigarette . iiace it
is not known which, if any, chemical compound in the total solida
is harmful, it is not helpful to the ss»ker to furnish his a quanti-
tative measurement of total solids, especially one which, as has beaa
stated in the two preceding paragraphs, cannot be accarate .
The conclusion is therefore inescapable that labeling the
amount of "tar and nicotine" on a cigarette package cannot fiw to
the smoker meaningful information as to the amount or composition
of the total solids and nicotine he receives from the cigarettes be
smokes . He is more likely to be misled than informed .
Mthods f,Qr Ifeasgrin;Total „fiolidg and llieotine
The following five methods for aeaauring total solids and
nicotine are described in Appendix At the Wolsisn sr thod (1) ;
the Consumer's Union method - No .' I(Z) ; the Cambridge pilter
s+ethod (3) ; the loster D . Snell method (4) ; and the Liggett i l~rers
Tobacco Company method (5) . It should be recognized that a aumber
of variations of such methods are poasible, and there may be other
methods . Those described in Appendix A, however, appear to be the
ones most commonly reported .

•4•
The five s+ethods described in Appendix A have not baen
cosQared on the s .me lot of cigarettes . Tbrea of the tsthods,
hos+ever, hive been compared by Xsith iNevsom (S) . '!be results
of such comparison show distinct variations, and were nported
to be as follows :
' Liggett i Myers

Consumer's ttaion Poster D . Snsll Tobacco Co .
h2thod _ No . 1 (2) _~th d (4) _ Method (S) .
Solids, mg ./cig . 18 .8 $4 .2 19 .1
Nicotine, mg ./cig . 2 .2 2 .9 3 .5
it ia of course clear even apart from such comparisons that the
various aethods described in Appendix A naosssarily will produce
different results, because they do not start with the same smoking
conditions .
Generally speaking each of the mthods requires from five to t•n
cigarettes for testing purposes . Tbe cigarettes are smoked by a
machine, which is designed to retain 100x of the particulate pbase
of the smoke . Each method proceeds on the basis of smoking the
cigarettes using a fixed volu .e of puff, • puff ot-srecific daratioa,
a fixed frequency of puffing, and a specific asomt of the cigarette
to be smoked . All s+ethods other than that of Liuett i lbers tisae a~
1S-ui . volume of puff . The most eoasson duration of puff is tro
seconds, and the most comson frequency of puff is otu per sinute .
The Wolsun method and the Caabridse Tilter tiatbod* s .oked a fisad
* See footnote, page 12

length of cigarette (47 na .) regardless of the length of the
cigarette being smoked and regardless of whether it is a filter
cigarette or not . tow of the methods amolc .e to a predetermined
butt length, for exanQle, 23 0 . ; in such siethods the length of
cigarette smoked would vary depending upon the initial leqgth of
the cigarette being tested and v_hether or not it is a filter
cigarette . The Liggett iWers method smokes fourteen puffs of
each cigarette, so that the number of puffs taken determines the
length of the cigarette smoked .
From the foregoing it is apparent that each of ths .rthods
has adopted arbitrary smoking babita for the smoking tachine, which
habits do not correspond with the habits of each individual smoker .
The volume of puff taken in smoking a cigarette (6, 7, 10, 11), the
frequency of puffs (6, 10, 11, 13, 14), and the duration of the
puff (6-8, 10, 13, 14) vary among individuals . The length of
cigarettes smoked, or the butt length to which cigarettes are
smoked also varies among smokers (7-9, 11, 13) . lbese variations
necessarily mean that the amount of total solids astid nicotine
collected by the smoking machine is not the aaae as what the
individual smoker receives .
It is obvious of course that all smokers do not retain 1002
of the particulate phase as a smoking machine is designed to do .
The degree of inhalation differs appreciably s,oong individuals (11) .
Moreover, smokers who inhale hold the smoke in the lungs for
different times, some exhaling more Quickly than others (15) .
The amount of the particulate phase retained in the lungs
obviously~depends in part upon the time elapsing betwen inhalini
and exhaling . Smokers who do not inhale adait the smoke to their
mouths ; the duration of retention of the particulate phase in
their mouths obviously affects the extent of retention of solids (15) .
Other variations between smokers inelude the following : the
burning temperature of cigarettes varies from smoker to smoker
because of differences in smoking habits (6) ; the pressure drop
across a cigarette differs from smoker to smoker (6-a, 12, 14) ;
and the total number of puffs per cigarette and the time necessary
to consume a cigarette varies from smoker to smoker (8, 13) .
Successive puffs of an individual on the same cigarette uy
differ with respect to puff volume, puff duration and frequency,
degree of inhalation, tes4erature change by puffing, and pressure
drop produced by puffing (14) . The manner of smoking successive
cigarettes by an individual t.ay also differ . These differences
include length of cigarette eonsurd, total nueber of puffs per
cigarette, and time required to consume a cigarette (14) .
A11 of the variations so far mentioned have been the subject , .
of comaent in the scientific literature, and all would affect tha
asount of total solids and nicotine received by the individual
smoker as compared with a smoking machine . In addition, there
are other variable factors, .fiich have not been reported in the
scientific literature, and which saay affect the asount or
composition of total solids and aicotine deliverad to or retained

,1
by a saoke : . Some of these factors are :
a . Smoking at very low temperatures and very low humidity .
These conditions would prevail in the winter in the
nb'rthern states .
b . Smoking at reduced pressures, for example in the
mountainous states . There is some indication that
the rate of burning of a cigarette will differ
depending upon the altitude at which the cigarette
is smoked .
c . Smoking in areas which are either abnormally humid
or abnormally dry .
d . Smoking from a pack which has been open for more than
a day . The cigarettes nay lose appreciable moisture
under arid conditions . Although loss of moisture
wiil not affect weight of solids produced per ci6a-
rette, it is believed to affect the chemical composition
of smoke .
Variations in Ciaarettes
~.
The following variables affect the yield of total solids per
gram of tobacco product consumed, and composition of the smoke
and total solids :

a . Tobacco (37, 38) . 6ince tobacco is aa agridiltural
comiewdity, it is sot boaogen .oua . Its cbaracteristics
~ary from leaf to leaf of t6e sa.e plamt, asd vithin
the same Laf . Aad of course a .ariety of types,
grades, and blends of tobacco are used is'the smufacture
ot.cigarettes, such as jlus-cured, burley, aad Turkish
tobaccos, and blends of such tobaccos . ,
b . Filtra_ tion aad eressuXg droD (17,9~3i, 33~5 the higher
the degree of filtration, the lowar the total solids=
and the higher the pressure drop, the lwrer the total
solids . The efficiency of filters of the sar design
vill vary from filter to filter dapending upon the
construction or the .aaner ia•vliich the filter tar is
packed .
c . Pa~er porositr (Z6, 31, 38) . The cigarette paper Mhich
is normally supplied to tha cigarette sanufacturrt
usually has an appreciable range of porosity . %e solids
usually decrease as the porosity iscrrasos .
d .. Number of euffs ~~
.~~.~.~•
taken
.
to .~i~g~leattb
oonaus a w~
... r ~~~.
of
.~..r~L
aia_ arette (t7, 32) . For axaaple, lurley tobacco burns at .: .

a greater rate than other tobacco types= aed thus, a .
different number of puffs are reqnir+N~Ro oontosr t1~s sar

,
cigarette length of lurley, flue-cur.d, md llittdsb
tobaccos .
a. Moisture content qfciasrettes (27, 29, 38) . tbe ap of
the cigarette (e .p ., the length of tir on the retailer's

,` . ., .
shelf) sry af fact the nois ture cant.at . ''
f . Va_liations to _o,i„jotal solids snd,tiicotins in
Sach f (17, 22-24, 36) . It bas bsn suuest .d ia the
scientific litarature•tbat the asawat rd corposition of
total solids in later puffs .ariudly esouds that in
earlier puffs (22-24jt others report finding very little
difference between tbe asomts in the •arlr and late
puffs (17, 36) .
t. Additives on tobacco (16, 18, 20, 21, 259 30, 36) . The
amount of total solida and oo .position of the s .dce aad
solids vary with the asounts of additives such as licorioa
and glycerol . It is impossible to apply these to tobacco
uniformly .
Of course aow of the above-msntloosd variables are ietsr-
dependent= e .g ., filtration, paper porosity, and pressure drop .
Moreover, it should be qphasiad that there viil tie tariation tros
cigarette to cigarette ia the composition of sacb cisaratte Miss
to the nature of the cigarstts-sishint process . '
IM Qe s in the gM o sitt i~~ ow=rQta L~ .=wi

.
W
It has been pointed out that the a .amt of total solids aad
nicotine produced by smoking can be chsajed by a large number of
variable factors, including the type of tobacco, the efficiency of

•10-
the filter, and the porbsity of the citarette paper . As has been
osntioned in connuction vith such factors, they (and probably oths n)
aay also ciange the ratios of the various cowposrents of the eooks .
As a result, although the a*ount of total solids .ay teaain the saoe
or be reduced, the ratios of the co .poaents in the•total solids mp
be different .
-il-
.APp
._ .EMIX
IiE1'HODS FOR DETEMNATION QZ KICOTINE A& IMDS_
I . T_h Nolman! t~ethod_ (1)
The conditions for smoking are as followss
Length of cigarette a.okad - 47 millimeters (o .)

Length of butt - variable, depending on length•of cigarette
being used in test
Volume of puff - 3f sdlliliters (or cubic centimeters ; sl . or cc .)
Frequeecy of puff - one puff`per minute
Temperature of laboratory - 71' F .
Relative humidity of air - 45%
Clgarettes smoked for each determination - Five
In this and in other methods, the cigarettes are selected for

uniformity in moisture content, cigarette sise (if feasible),•
cigarette weight, firmness, and other characteristics .
Solids for determination of cot e are collected over 10 rl .

of alcohol acidified with sulfuric acid in a 300-al . Kjeldahl fluk .
Solution is treated with alkali and is then steam-distilled . The
steam distillate is then treated with silicotungstic acid to precip-
itate the silicotungstate . The silicotungstate is ssparated and is
ignited to an ash . The weight of the ash is uaed in the calculation
of the nicotine value . However, since in this method, other alkaloids
could coprecipitate with nicotine as ailicotungstates, this datermina-
tion in reality may, depending on conditions of the experiment, yield
the alkaloid value or the total alkaloid value . Mother itss to note
is that the silicotungatic procedare can also be described as the
gravimetric procedure - implying that a weighing is performed in tLe
determination of nicotine .
Sol~tds_ (designated as tars in tbe article) are determined by ,

gravity deposition of smoke aver 25 rl . of 0 .11 aqueous sulfuric
acid . The mixture is extracted with chloroform . The chloroford
solution is heated to evaporate the chloroform . The residue is then
heated, or dried, for three hours at 100' C . (!12' F .) . The weight :
of material remaining after the beating is reported as tars .
~_ e Consumer's Union Method - tlo . I(2)
Smoking conditions :
Length of cigarette smoked - variable, depending upon length of

cigarette being used in test
Length of butt - 23 sss .
-12-
Volume of puff - 35 ml .
Duration of puff - 2 seconds
Frequency of puff - one per minute
Room emperature - Not stated
itelat~ve Humidity - Not stated
Cigarettes smoked for each deteriination - eight
Smoke for nicotine and solids is absorbed in acidified alcohol .

One portion of the alcohol solution is treated with base and is
steam-distilled . Nicotine in steas distillate is measured by means
of a spectrophotometer . This then is a spectrophotometric proeedure,
whereas thi Wolman method described above is a gravimetric procedure .
The second portion of the alcoholic solution is acidified,

diluted with water, and is then extracted with chloroform . The water
layer is made alkaline and is re-extracted with chloroform . The two
chloroform extracts are combined . Removal of chloroform from com-
posite by evaporation yields the tar, which is then s'rrjighed .•
III L, The CambridAe Filter Nethod (3) - Sometimes referred :,to as•the
American Tobacco Co . Method or the Consumer's Union Nethod-~to . II .
Length of cigarette smoked - 47 =m .*

Length of butt - variable, depending on length of cigarette
being tested
-Volume of puff - 35 al .
Du;ation of puff - 2 sec .
Frtquency of puff - one per minute
Temperature of laboratory - Not stated
Relative humidity of laboratory - Not stated
Number of cigarettes smoked per determination - ten
Smoke from a cigarette is collected on a glass fiber filter

material, Cambridge filter medium CM-113 . The weight of material
retained on the filter represents total solids (total particulate
phase) . A part of the material retained on the Cambridge filter is Ln
water (about 12% in smoke from a 70-mm . blended, non-filter cigarette) . ~
This method, therefore, would include water in the value for total 6,
solids, whereas the preceding two methods would not . ~
~
It should be noted that in the Cambridge filter method outlined by

~ Ogg et A1 . (39 , ~ t
® 40) ss+okes the cigarette under test to
`• a 30-am . butt length . Further modifications of this method,
including length of cigarette to be smoked, are under consideration
by the Analytical Methods Coamittee of the Tobacco Cbemists' Research
Conference .
-13-
To determine nicotine, the Cambridge filter with the retained

solids is extracted with 0 .1 N_ Sulfuric acid . The solution, after
washing with chloroform, is made alkaline and is steam-distilled .
Nicotine in the steam distillate is determined either by the gravi-
metric metAod (silicotungstic acid precipitation, aahing and weighing
of ash) or by the spectrophotometric method .
IV . The Foster D . Snell Hethod (4)
Length"cf butt - 23 mm . -
Length of cigarette smoked - variable, depending on length of
cigarette being tested
Volume of puff - 35 ml .
Duration of puff - 2 sec .
Frequency of puff - one per minute
No . of cigarettes smoked for each determination - five
Room conditions not specified
For solids determination (tar content in communication) smoke

is collected in acidified alcohol . The alcohol solution is heated
on a steam bath (at 100' C ., 212' F .) to evaporate the alcohol .
After about five hours, the residue is heated in the beaker at 105' C .
for beven hours . The weight of material remaining in the beaker is
designated as the tar content .
To determine nicotine, the acidified alcohol solution containing

the smoke solids (on aliquot portion) is heated to remove the alcohol,
the residue is made alkaline and is steam-distilled . Nicotine is
determined gravimetrically in the steam distillate (ailicotungstic
method) .
V . The Li,ggett and Myers Tobacco Co . Method (5)
Number of puffs - 14 - the only method of the five enumerated

here which uses the number of puffs as the controlling factor
in the amount of cigarette to be smoked .
Length of cigarette to be smoked - Variable, depending on length
of cigarette being tested,
blend of tobacco, pressure drop,
and other factors
Length of butt - Variable, as in preceding item
Volume of puff - 44 ml . (all preceding methods above, 35 al .)
Duration of puff - 1 .9 sec .
Frequency of puff - One every 30 seconds (all preceding methods
above , one pe r ssin . ) .
-14 -
Room temperature - 75' F .

Relative humidity of room - 60 2
Cigarettes smoked for each detersiaatioa - ten ; however . it is
Oecoamended that three to six such determinations be carried
out and the results averaged .
The smoke in the present a+ethod is retained on an alpha-cellulose

trap .
The alpl .a-cellulose is washed with hot acidic sk thyl alcohol .

The solutioii is extracted with cf -iloroform .
To determine solids (termed tar in the articles) the chloroform

solution is evaporated on the steam bath and heating is continued for
3 hours at 105' C . Tar value is determined by weighing the residue .
The extracted methanol solution is made alkaline and is steam-

distilled . Nicotine is determined in the steam distillate apectro-
photometrically .
-17-
Lindsey, A . J ., Persaud, K ., and Candeli, A ., Reducti,on of

Benzpyrene in Cigarette Smoice . BRIT . MED . J ., i= (ii), 821 . f
Lipp, 6 ., and Van Hooy, H ., lieue tiethoden sMr Nn,~,ssuaQ der_Foro_,_ at
von Ciaaretten,pauier ,u,n¢ des Ve,Btia,t, laaeara es von Ciaaretten . Y
BEITR . TABAKFORSCH .,,1962L (9), 369-384 .
Newsod; J . R ., and Keith, C . H ., 0uantitativ* Studies dies oa Ciaa,rette

Smoke . II . The Effect of Phvsica,l Variab es gA the iJe,ieht s~f,, Smoka .
TOBACCO SCIENCE, t, 58-63 (1957) .
:- -
Nicod, J . L ., The Acute To,gdcitv and Carcinoaenic Povej of obacco
Extracted by CC14 . Z . PRAVENTIVMED ., ¢,, 444-454 (1961) .
.
Sato, T ., Fukuyama, T ., Suzuki, T ., Takayanagi, J . and Sakai, T ., ~
Difference in Mortality Rate from Luna Cancer betzveen Several_Countries
Where Cigarettes Are Smoked,~and Observations the Low Humidityof
Qarett~es, in Winter in Heated Rgc, . SULL . INST . PUB . HEALTH
(Japan), 1, 31-35 (1961) .
Scherbak, M ., Rice, R . L ., and De Souza, J . E ., An llbsolute #Igthod

for the Aeternination of 3 .4-Bensvvrene in Ciaarette Ssroke . Paper ,~
Presented at 17th Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference, Montreal, P .Q .,
Canada, September 22-24 (1963) .
Schur, M . 0 . and Rickards, J . C ., Design and Overation of a Plultivle ~

Cijzarette Smokinjt Machine . TOBACCO SCIENCE, l, 13-20 (1957) .
Segelken, D ., Schroder, R . and Seehofer, F ., The Effect of Number

of Puffs and .of Puf f Serial Number on Ciaarette Smoke Condensate . ~
TABAK TECHNIKUM E{AMBURG TECHNISCHE-WISSENSCHAFTLICHE SCHRIFFTENREIHE,
1962, 1-7 (September) .
Uhlman, W ., Statistical Remarks o_ n,the Research of_ J . L . Nicod on

the Carcinogenic Effects of Pre-exticted Tobacco . Z . PR*VENTIVMED .,
8 140-144 (1963) .
Wa1t .., P . and Hauaermann, M ., Modern Filter Cigarettes and Their ~

Effects on Smoking Habits and Inh ql,ed . ~ . .PRAVENTIVM$D .,
Substaa sS~
. .-....~_..
8, 73-98 (1963) :Y
. . L . and
.Wynder,E Hoffmsn, D ., So` Practical Aspects of the .; ~
Smoking-Cancer Problem . NEW ENG . J . MED ., 2 2, 540-545 (1960) . `'
Wynder, E . L . and Hoffman, D ., Present Status of LaboratoryStudies 5 ;

on Tobacco Carcinogenesis . ACTA PATHOL . MICROBIOL . SCAND ., 2 a/,
119-132 (1961) . cr
0
M
~
r
W
N
5171 0 4947 r
r.
wynder, E . L . and Hoffman, D ., 152erimental Conttibution l~frt~
Concerning Tobacco S,moke, CanceroRenesis . DBtJT . MED . WOCHSCHR ., ~8
623-628 (1963) .
Wynder ; E . L ., and Hoffmaa, D ., E~eriaental Tobacco Carcinoaenesis .

ADV . CANCER RESEARCH, 8, . 249-453 (1964) r
Ogg, C . L ., Bates, W . W ., Jr ., Cogbill, 8 . C ., Blackmore, R . H .,

and Petersen, E . L ., Determination,of Total Paiticulate !latter . /
Nicotine, and Water in Ciaarette Smoke . J . ASSOC . OFF . ACR . CM . V,
45, 540,545 (1962) . _
Ogg, C . L ., Determination of Particulate Natter and Alkaloids ,~

(as Nicotine) in Ciaarette Smoke . J . ASSOC . OFF . AGR . CHEM .,
.4_7_v ~/
356-362 (1964) .
ELI OCRAPHY
Wc,iman, W ., A Study of Cigarettes . Ciaarette .Smoke, and Filters . l

ls Fi__ ]~ter-Tip Cigarettes . J . AM . MED . ASSOC ., 152, 917-920 (1953)
. v
Consumer Reports, Cistarettes : A Three oart Report . CONSUMER

REPORTS, 20, (2), 56-74 (1955) .
Wartman, W . B ., Cogbill, E . C ., and Harlov, E . S ., Determination /

of Particulate Matter in Concentrated Aerosols . Application t Vo
M a1vsiT of Cigarette Smoke ._ ANAL . CHEM ., 31, 1705-1709 (1959) .
Sk)ecial communication from Cyril S . Kimball (of Foster D . Snell) on :

Methodolo v Employed in Determination of Tar and Nicotine Content
of Cigarette Smoke for Reader's Digest .
! 5 . Keitl :, C . H ., and Newsome, J . R ., Quantitative Studies on Cigarette ~ o

~ A Smoke
i S . 1ki
. M Mutoma140t c TOBACCO
mo n ac : n SCIENCE
. 1 .51-57
. ~
(1957~• 2 The Effect of Phvs i ca l V ar i abl es on the WeiAht of Smoke .
d ., 1, 58-63 (1957) ; a Methods of Ana Lvsis for Filter Ciaarettes . 1
Ibid ., 2, 14-19 (1958) . (' 1<41\1
Cuzin, J . L ., et al ., L'Acte Saecifiaue du Fumer . PROC . 2ND

INTERNAT . SCI . TOBACCO CONGRESS, 1958, ,-521-535 .
~
t
Schur, M . 0 ., and Rickards, J . C .,Design d Oaeration of Multiale ,~A
n
Ciaarette Smoking Machine . TOBACCO SCIENCE, 1, )3-20 (1957)
. C ., On Cigarette SmokinA, Bronchial Carcinoma, and

.hildng,A
Cilinry Action I . Smoking Habits And Measurement of Smoke Intake .
'7Et; ENC . J . MED ., 254, 776=781 (1956) .
Finkncr, A . L ., Horvitz, D . C ., Foradori, C . T ., Fleischer, J ., and

Monroe, J ., M_ Investig,ation of the Measurement of Current Smokina
by Individuals . July (1957) . •
Derr, R . B ., Riesmeyer, A . H ., and Unangst, R . B ., Ramoval o

Undesirable Constituents from Tobacco Smoke . IND . ENG . CHEM .,
f
2y, 771•776 (1937) .
Cigarette Components, Ltd ., Ci aarette Smokina : StudX of Certain

Asgects of Human Smokin Ha s . October, 1957 .
~
Bradford, J . A ., Harlan, W . R ., and Hanmer, H . R ., Nature re of_
Ci arette Smoke : Technic of Exaerimenta S,moking . IND . ENG . CHEM ., J
28, 836-839 (1936) .
51710 4949
Bentley, it . R ., and Burgan, J . G ., Cigare ke Condensate :
Prepar~tion and Routine Laboratory Esti :nation . TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS'
STANDING COWITTEE, RESEARCH PAPER NO . 4, 2ND EDITION, 1961 .
.Sta+ib,"M ., and Furrer, H ., Tobacco InvestiAatiqg . _ e Reoroduci-

bilitv of Smoke Investixations . MIT . LEBENSHIT . HYG ., J1, 94-116 V
(1957) .
Mitchell, R . I ., Controlled Measurement of fim6,ke-particle Retentioa V

in the Respiratory Tract . AM . REV . RESPIRATORY DIS ., jj, 526-532
(1962),.
I
Alvord, E . T ., and Caxb6n, S . Z ., The Inhibition f F_ormatiot~of

3 4;BenzpYrene in Cia~rette Smoke . BRIT . J . CANCER, }s,, 498-503 (1956) .
Ayres, C . I ., Fordyce, W . B ., and Hughes, I . H ., Ciaarettes : The v

Potential of a Tobacco to Produce Smoke . Paper presented at 17th
Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference, lbntreal, P . Q ., Canada,
September 22-25 (1963) .
Bentley, H . R ., aad Burgan, J . G ., Polynuclear Hydrocarbons in l'

Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . Part III . The Inhibition of the Formati Von
of 3 .4-Benzpyrene in Ciaarette Smoke . ANALYST, IL, 727-730 (1960) .
Bock, F . C ., Moore, C . E ., Dowd, J . E ., and Clark, P . C ., Carcino¢enic

Activity of CaaLette Smoke Condensates :: Bi-o_loA+ical Activity__of
Refined Tar from Certain Brands of Cigarettes . J . A . NED . ASSOC . Y
181, 668-673 (1962) .
-~; Candeli, A ., Lindsey, A : J ., and Persaud, K ., Cigarette Paper

Containing Amconiu,g Su amate and Carcinoaenic .Hvdrocarboas .
SOC . ITAL . BIOL. SPER ., a, 452-4.54 (1960) .
J
Cuzin, J . L ., Testa, A ., Testa, S ., and Anguera, C ., Chemical and
Bioloaical Control of, the Ggndensetes Rettiltinst from the Smokina of V
Tobacco Treated by the Patented Neukoom-Bonnet Procedure .
Z . PRAVENTIVMED ., B, 125-137 (1963) .
Kotin, P., and Falk, H . L ., e Role and Action of Environmental

Agents in the Pathogenesis of Luna Cancer . 11, Ci, Qaretle -$mk~.
f
CANCER, 13, 250-262 (1960) .
. Lindsey, A . J ., The Comoosition of Cigarette Smoke : Studies on

Stubs and Tips . BRIT . J . CANCER,,Us 195-199 (1959) .
~
Lindsey, A . J ., Some Observations rvations Upon the Chemistry of Tobacco
Smoke . Chapter in James, G ., and Rosenthal, T ., "Tobacco and Hea1t ',
Springfield, Illinois, C . C . Thomas, 116j, 21-32
. 1
51710 4950
L .J
• FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIDN .

/Yasbington, D.C. 20S80
,.
OFFICE OF INFORUATlON M-6800 Ext. 197 .
• For RCLEASC: I1•:-MDIATE, Friday ttarch 25, 1956 .
~ The Federal Trade Comission today announced that it,has sent identical letters
• to each of the nation's major cigarette manufactu•rera and to Mr . Robert D . tdeyner, :

.i
Adainistrator ot Fhe'Cigarette Advertising Code, Inc ., in regard to factual state-
:
' ments of tar and • nicotino content on labcls and in advertising of cigarettes . ~
i
The text of the letter is as followss ' , .•
.i . .
i
~ Gentlaoens
The Cigarette Advertising Guides proawlgated by the Commission in
Septembor 1953 provided that no representation should be made that "any
brand of cigarette or the smoke therefroa is low in nicotine or tars *+~ *'
when it has not been established by competent scientific proof applicable
at the time•of dissemination that the elaim is true, and if true, that
such difference or differences are significant ." On the basis of the !
--•--•»•-- facts now available to it, the Commission has deterainsd that a factual
statement of theQ and nicotine content (expressed in milligre-'es) of f
the mainstream srao~ce from a cigarette trould not be in violation ot such
Guides, or of any of the ptovisions ot latr administered by the Co=issioy,
so long as (1) no collateral representations (other than factual state-
suats of tar and nicotine contents of cigarettes offered for sale to the ,
~ .
public) are made, expressly or by implication, as•to reduction or elinina-
; tion of health haaarda, and (2) the statement of tar and nicotine content
is supported by adequate records of tests conducted in accordance t+ith
the Cambridge Filter Method, as described in an article entitled "Deterai-
nation of Particulate Matter and Alkaloids (as Nicotine) in Cigarette
Smoke," by C .,L . Ogg, which appeared in the Journal .of the Asaoeiation ~ :
of Of•ficial Agricultural Chemists, Vol . 47, No . 2, 1964 . It is the
Comcaission's position that it is in the public interest to promote the
dissemination of truthful inforaution concerning ,cigarettes which may be
materi~al and desired by the consuming publie,
8y direction of the Coaoaiesion . ' .• . ~
. Joseph W . Shea,
• Seeretary . • .
. . .
., .
1 33 1 .5 60 23 .7 1 .60 9 .3
3 35 2 .5 24 .1 1 .43 9 .1
• Data are from Itix (1979) who also presented similar data for the 85-mm Marlboro . Rix also presented data on the
yields of TPM, TPM water, and carbon monoxide .
b Data represent the average "tar" and nicotine yields from Samples Noi . S through 10 .
Rix (1979) also compared the effect on the carbon monoxide, nicotine, and "tar" yields
from the 85-mm Winston and 85-mm Marlboro of changing the major FTC smoking parameters
(35-m1 puff volume, 2 .0-sec puff duration, 60-sec puff frequency) to more "realistic""
smoking conditions (65-m1 volume, 2 .0-sec duration, 45-sec frequency) . Table 9 summarizes
the results obtained . At the higher puff volume and frequency, the % differences between the
Winston and the Marlboro become less for MS "tar" and nicotine yields, with the Winston yield
being the higher . In the 150-page report by Rix, there are numerous plots of the relationships
between carbon monoxide, nicotine, and "tar" yields and puff volume, duration, and frequency
for the 85-mm Wlnston and Marlboro . Also included are plots (2-sec puff duration, 1 puff/min)
of the "tar"/nicotine ratios vs puff volume for the following brands : Winston, Camel, Vantage,
Now, More, Real, and Marlboro.
TABLE 9 : 8S-mm WINS'liDN AND BIARl.BORO: COMPARISON OF FTC CARBON

MONOJaDE, NICOTINE, AND "TAR" YIELDS AT STANDARD AND MORE
"REALISTIC" SMOKIIVG PARAMETERS
FTC "Tar" . FTC Nicotine, FI'C CO, "Tar"lNicotine
cjg .roue /cpyc irt pg/cIrt - lciat Ratio
FI1C smoking rondlHonr (3S,nd pqJ, 2.0•sec pulduradon, oxe p{D'every 60 sec)
Wtnatat 20.6 (20 .9)• 1 .43 (24 .5) 19 .1 (15 .2) 14 .4 (-4 .8)
Marlboro 16 .3 1 .08 16 .2 15 .1
"Realttde" snwktng condidons (6 .f-rnl pqD; 2.4see pqfdunuton, one pqfevery 45 see)
1Hnsron 35 .7 (iS .7) 2 .35 (16 .8) 33 .9 (15 .3) 15 .2 (-2 .6)
Marlboro 30.1 1 .93 28 .7 15 .6

' Numbera in parentheses represent % difference between WINSMN and JNdRLBORO :
% Difference - 100(Wfngton - Marlboro)lliRroron
In a similar study on the 100-mm Winston and the now defunct 120-mm Dawn, Dobbins
(1984) elected to vary the puff volumes at different puff frequencies with the puff duration
13 Whether the "realistic" conditions for 1979 amokets would apply to current (1994) smokers Is not known . Two years later, Herning er
al. (1981) observed that filter cigarette smokers took a 35 .9- to 47 .8-m1 puff of 1 .94 to 2.06 aec every 26 .9 to 30.0 sec .
27
c:lfdaniclnicotn-1 . fda
revised 11-02-95
COMWIM re FDA NICOTINE REPORT : GENERAL
• "tar" reduction plus nicotine reduction - graph presented by

Wakeham, Surgeon General, etc .
1954 nicotine delivery level = 2 .7-3 .0 mg/cigt
steady decrease in nicotine delivery vs time : current

nicotine delivery, even if modified slightly for low-
"tar" vs regular-'4tar", is substantially less than
the 1954 value
why did FDA elect to consider nicotine delivery

levels only from 1982 to 1991? (see p .267-270]
Are the data correct that the sales weighted average
nicotine delivery for all cigarettes increased from
1982 to 1991? Recollection : nicotine level was
decreasing gradually through 1986119871
Is it because of the substantial decrease in sales

weight average nicotine delivery from 2 .7-3 .0
mg/cigt 1954 to about 1 .0•1.1 mg/cigt in 1980 .
If the tobacco companies were so eager to "hook"

the consumer, why did they reduce the nicotine
delivery so drastically?
what was the fate of the low-nicotine or zero-

nicotine cigarettes marketed around the world (U .S.
- Sano, brand in Gennany, etc .?) Most were
withdrawn within a year or two found them
unacceptable . The Sano was marketed for many
years but eventually was withdrawn because of
extremely low sales.
why did FDA cite Imperial Tobacco Company U .S.

patent for enhancing nicotine? Imperial is not a
U.S. company and sells few cigarettes in this U .S.
. "tar"tnicotine ratio proposals of Russell and Jarvik :

substantially decrease "tar" delivery but not
nicotine delivery or substantially decrease "tar"
delivery but decrease nicotine delivery only slightly .
post-1954 it was the practice of U .S. tobacco

companies, particularly RJRT, to investigate all
suggestions from external sources pertinent to
smoking-health issues :
1 . clean bill of health from Surgeon

General in 1964 re nicotine
2. recommendation by Wynder et al .
(late 1950s, 1964 review, 1967
book, 1968 monograph) that
reducing "tar" delivery by 50% or
more would reduce respiratory tract
cancer: mouse skin-painting studies
indicated that such a reduction in
"tar" dose lowered the % tumor-
bearing animals from m45 to 0%!
more recent studies in the 1968-1980
NCI smoking-health program on the
"less hazardous" cigarette
essentially confirmed the earlier
findings by Wynder et at.
(a) when the tobacco

industry accomplished
an approximately 50
% "tar" reduction by
cigarette design, the
reduction was not
considered to be
enough
(b) When reduction of
approximately 70 %
in the sales weighted
average "tar'• was
accomplished (40
mg/cigt in 1954 vs 11
mg/cigt in early
1990s). other factors
were emphasized
2
(increased use of
flavorants in low-
"tar" cigarettes,
harmful pyrolysis
products from
flavorants, smoke
nicotine level, tobacco
nitrate level and N-
nitrosamines, blocking
of filter-tip ventilation
holes by the smoker,
environmental tobacco
smoke diversion, etc .
3 . levels of tumorigenic polycyclic

aromatic hydrocarbons in MS could
be reduced by
(a) filtration (reduction of

"tar" delivery)
(b) reduction of
polycyclic aromatic
hydro-carbon
precursors in tobacco
( s a t u r a t e d
hydrocarbons,
phytosterols,
terpenoids) by
extraction of tobacco
with organic solvents;
because the extraction
produced only a slight
lowering of the
tobacco nicotine level,
the level of MS
nicotine was only
slightly reduced
(c) addition of burn
modifies, g e,.,
nitrate, to tobacco
and/or to the cigarette
paper (citrate) ; both
these technologies
reduced the MS
3
-1
nicotine level
(d) inclusion of processed
tobaccos (RTS,
expanded tobacco) in
the blend ; both
processed tobaccos
yielded reduced
nicotine levels in the
blend and its MS
(e) air dilution (cigarette
paper porosity, filter-
tip ventilation)
4. levels of tumorigenic N-nitrosamines

could be reduced by
(a) filtration (volatile N-

nitrosamines removed
selectively from MS
by plasticized fliter
tips)
(b) use of low-nitrate
tobacco or by removal
of nitrate from
tobacco and/or stems
by extraction, etc.
(c) addition of high
molecular weight
saturated
hydrocarbons .
5. compare the changes in the anti-

tobacco investigators suggestions
over time: reduction of levels of
tumorigenic polycyclic aromatic 10
hydrocarbons in MS by removal of
their precursors from tobacco by
extraction andlor by addition of
nitrate or use of high-nitrate
tobaccos vs reduction of tumorigenic
N-nitrosamines by addition of high
molecular weight saturated
hydrocarbons (a demonstrated
4
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
precursor) and/or removal of r.itrate
from the tobacco or use of low-
nitrate tobaccos
6. according to some authorities (Van

Duuren et al., 1960), level of
tumorigenic aza-arenes in MS is
related to nicotine level of tobacco ;
however, at least seven different
studies conducted in the U .S., Japan,
and Germany between 1963 and
1992 failed to confirm the presence
of the tumorigenic aza-arenes in MS
(Candeli et a1 ., 1963 ; Kaburaki et
al., 1970; Schmeltz et a1., 1972,
1979; Snook, 1978 ; Snook et al.,
1981 ; Grimmer et a1., 1986, 1987 ;
Kamata et al., 1992)
7. levels in MS of allegedly promoting

low molecular weight phenols can be
reduced by
(a) filtration : phenols are

selectively removed
from MS by
plasticized filter tips
(b) addition of nitrate or
use of high-nitrate
tobacco
levels of low molecular weight

phenols in MS are Increased by
organic solvent extraction of tobacco
RJRT efforts re flue-cured standards association (?)

and burley standards association to have acceptable
nicotine range for new tobacco introductions
modified so that a lower lower limit was acceptable :
range was altered by the associations but reduction
of lower limit was less than requested, upper limit
remained unchanged ; major opposition included the
farmers (yield per acre and revenue) and at least
5
one other tobacco company (L&M) ; L&M
maintained the position that the nicotine range
should not be modified because of the importance of
nicotine to the smoker, l .e., it was the major reason
why smokers smoked
level of nicotine in MS may be reduced by
(a) solvent extraction of the tobacco

(polar solvent more efficient in
removing nicotine than nonpolar
solvents)
(b) addition of nitrate or use of high-
nitrate tobacco in the blend
(c) inclusion of processed tobaccos
(RTS, expanded tobacco) in the
blend
(d) use of . genetically designed low-
nicotine tobaccos or low-nicotine
tobaccos grown under reduced
nitrogen/nitrate fertilization
: levels of precursors of flavorful smoke
components are usually proportional
to nicotine level of tobacco, hence
flavor becomes less acceptable to
smoker
(e) use of filters containing acidic
additives which will react with MS
nicotine, removing it from the MS
stream
6
• suggestions by investigators such as Russell, Jarvik, and others that the design of
a "safer" cigarette should involve the substantial reduction of "tar" delivery and
either maintenance of the nicotine delivery at the level it was prior to
manipulation of the "tar" delivery or only involve a slight reduction of the
nicotine delivery' . E.g., Russell and coworkers suggested that
a low-tar, low CO, but nedimr-, rather than low-, nicotine

cigarette might reduce tar and CO intake more than occrrrs
with low-tar, low-CO, low-nk+ntlne cigarmes
Finally, a case will be made for a medtian-nlcntine, low-tar,

low-carbon monaxtde (CO) ctgarette.. . [emphasis added:
AR]
I Ruaell MAR, WUwn C, PaW UA, Cde W, and Peyenbend C(1979), Compedwo of 1he BReet on Tob .ooo Coorump8on and
Carbon Moooxlde Ab .oep8oa of Cha*q to Hijh and Low Nlcado . C*reqe. . BRIT. M®. J .1973 PW): 512 ; RuaeU MAH,
Cole PV, Idle MS, and Adame L(1975), Ceebon MonoxWe Ykldi of CSpreaa and T6eir Rel .doa to Nioodne Yield and Type of
Fiher. BRIT. MED. J. 1971 ft : 71 ; Ru ..eU MAH (19M, Low-T.r, Medium-Nicodo. Clpreuee: A Nerr Appra .c6 to Safer
Smokn. BAIT. M®. J .1976 p) : 1430; (19E0), lti.k Rednodon Ao6ievemems and Fuame Direodoos .lo God 09 and Bock FQ
(8dttor.) . d Sqfs Qaaftaet danbary Repmt 3, Cold Sprioj Hubor Leboatory . Cold Spring H.ebor NY :137-177; (1950), T6e Ca .e
for Medium-Nicodne, Lo .v Tu, Low Carbon Monoxide Ci ;areaa .ln God GB and Book tO (Ediwrs) . A So Qamrael Banbwry
RepoR 3, Cold SprinS Harbor Lebor .tory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 297-310.
7
EXHIBITNO .____~&
Wit: ^
Date:
Rptr:
C : \fdanlc\Ilico fil-2. fda
Revised 11-25-95
COMMENTS re FDA NICOTINE REPORT : NICOTINE & AMMONIA
In its 1995 report, the FDA discussed the chemical manipulation, particularly the use of
ammonia and ammonium compounds, to enhance nicotine delivery' .
• tobacco treated with ammonia/steam (the process used by RJRT to

reduce the nicotine level in high-nicotine tobaccos) produces the
following changes:
in the tobacco
(a) reduced nicotine level (% reduction

is dependent on processing
parameters set by Company to
achieve a certain nicotine level)
(b) reduced sugar level (% reduction is
dependent on processing parameters
set by Company to achieve a certain
nicotine level)
(c) increased levels of alkylpyrazines (%
increase is dependent on processing
parameters set by Company to
achieve a certain nicotine level)
in the MS from the ammonia-treated tobacco
(a) on an equal weight of tobacco

smoked basis, the nicotine delivery is
lower in the MS from the processed
tobacco than in the MS from the
control tobacco
(b) the MS from the processed tobacco
contains higher levels of flavorful
pyrazine and alkylpyrazines than the
control tobacco MS (pyrazines are
highly flavorful compounds that
impart desirable flavors to tea,
~
~~
~ United States Fc1pd and Drug Administration (FDA) (1995) Nicotine in Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco Products Is a Drug and ~
~
The.e Products are Nicotine Delivery Devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act . US FDA DHHS: 1-326 (August) :
249-250 .
coffee, cocoa, peanuts, roasted
meats, etc.)
(c) the MS from the processed tobacco
contains higher levels of pyridine
and alkylpyridines which, at low
concentrations, are flavorful ; the
source of the pyridines in MS is
primarily nicotine which is an
indication that more of the nicotine
in the ammonia treated tobacco is
being decomposed during the
smoking process than that in the
control tobacco
(d) the level of ammonia in MS is
increased
While the precise wording of the definition of a "safer" or "less hazardous" cigarette
as enunciated by different investigators has varied slightly during the intervening years, the
essence of it is essentially the same now as it was forty years ago, namely, a "safer" or "less
hazardous" cigarette has been defined over the past forty years or so as one whose MS
particulate matter has been reduced and whose MS particulate matter shows reduced specific
tumorigenicity as measured in mouse skin-painting studies= . Within this definition has been the
implication that the total particulate matter should show, on a per milligram basis, reduced levels
of those MS components considered responsible, at least in part, by some investigators for the
observed tumorigenicity in laboratory animaW . Much effort in the 1950s and 1960s was
directed toward the reduction of the MS delivery of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons shown to
be tumorigenic to laboratory animals under certain experimental conditions. Subsequent research
involved methods to reduce the allegedly promoting phenols, the ciliastatic vapor-phase
components (aldehydes, ketones, hydrogen cyanide, low molecular weight acids), and the
volatile and tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines . I
Expansion of tobacco lamina has been accomplished by a variety of processes . The first
three methods developed were the RJRT process involving the expansion of tobacco lamina with
a chlorofluorocarbon, the NCSU process involving the expansion of moistened tobacco lamina
by freeze drying, and the PM process involving the expansion of tobacco by sequentially treating
0 Wyndor BL and Hot6n.m D (1964), $xpeeimeatal Tob.ooo C.roioopo..b . ADV. CANCER RES. d: 249-453; (1967), Tobaoco
ard Tobacro Stinoks: Sawbu fn &Psri+nertai CarbWjauitr . Ik .dendo lkea, No .v York NY; dod aB (Bditoc) (1976) . Report IJo.
! . To+wd Lea Astardow Qaanaa. 711e Ptrrt Set of Bxperlamwl aaamrxa . DBEW P.bl. No. (Nffi) 76-90d ; (1976),1tePoa
No. 2. Towand Lsrt 8atardow Qjanaa. 711t Ssowj Sn 4fSxpsdnanal atanau . DHEW ML No. OM 76-1111; (1977),
Report No. d. Toward Lar flataidow Qsairaa . The 7Mrd Set tVBfepabrwrtd Qaanasi . DHEW l.bl . No. (NtEi) 77-12ft
(1980, Report IYo. 4. Toward Leu liouWdour Qaanaa . 7bs Powdr Sst qf6spsrbnenrol Qaanaa. DSEW PpDI. (MH) MareJr
(19> 0); NNloo.l C.ncer Uutiwte (19ad), Rsport Ab . S. Towond Lssn BetwdoNr Qaanwt . swwary: Powr Slhl» Palndna Bfoauayi
uslna Coidsrrsort,Jbm BsperlnenrW a6anaa . DHEW PaN. (ND!) (SePteAber 19®0).
3 Oori OB (Fdiwr) (1976), RsPort lYo. 2. Towand Lar Rauudowr aaanaa. 71u Saod Sst ofEacperieientd Qaorrau . DHEW Pobl.
No. (NID) 76 .1111 .
a
it with ammonia and carbon dioxide (in situ generation of ammonium carbonates) . Tobaccos
expanded by these three process were studied as part of the second series of experimental
cigarettes' in the NCI "less hazardous" cigarette program .
In Table 1 are shown selected data from the NCI study of these three processes and their
effect on tobacco and tobacco smoke composition . The data concerning the ammonia treated
tobacco are particularly pertinent to the FDA claims .
TABLE 1. THE EFFECT OF AMMONIA/CARBON DIOXIDE EXPANSION

OF TOBACCO ON TOBACCO AND MAINSTREAM SMOKE
COMPOSITIONs
Exoandon Procea
PM % DiK RJRT NCSU

Aaeltct4 Ssa6csl N1L42W Yt.Sontrd Fcesn.l1 W
nicotina. 96 (!ab 1) 1 .64 0 .80 -57 1 .57 1 .37

nicotine, 96 (lab 2) 1 .74 1 .03 -41 1 .63 1 .50
nicotiae, % (lab 3) 1 .33 1 .03 -44 1 .73 1 .65
aveu;e 1 .80 0.95 -47 1 .64 1 .37
ammonia, 96 0.059 0.064 8 .S 0.056 0.027
didutmenk
TPM, anS Jcijt 32.76 22.33 -32 18 .66 19 .56
nicotine, my/ci6t 1 .79 0 .74 -59 0.78 0 .92
"ar••, m6/dst 27.07 18 .20 -33 15 .63 16 .34

ntcotioeP'ue, eado 0.066 0 .041 ,9a 0.050 0 .050
pH 5 .15 6.26 21 5 .09 4.87
baazo(aJpyrone, p61s TPM 0 .73 0.45 -40 0.76 0.57

beaz[aJamhncena, µa/g TPM 0 .93 0.6S -30 0.83 0.94
pbanoi, mW` TPM 124 65 -IS 48 68
S tumorbearins aaimda, 25 mg CSC/day 47.3 36 -24 37 36
` NH~Icp=,• expaotion .yam ia ammooialcnbae dioxids

~ pD ~ fivaze dtied
t3~
~
0 Qorl 09 (Editor) (1976) . Rsport Ab. 2. rawnnilesr Ratandort aaarruei. 711s SsoaWser oEspsrirenrat aaanaa . DHER' Yabi. ~
No. QVIH) 76-1111 . B
© Oort OB (Editor) (1976), Itcport Na . 2. rowan! lsa Razonlowr aaanata. 7ris Sscart Setq/EYpsrbnenwl aaamra . DREW Pbbi .
No. (NIH) 76-1111 .
For the samples studied in the NCI program on a "less hazardowus" cigarette, the
ammonia treatment produced the following effect on the tobacco:
• a reduction (47 %) of the % nicotine in the tobacc o

• an increase (8 .5 %) in the level of ammonia in the tobacc o
These changes in tobacco composition produce changes in the smoke composition and
its biological properties :
• a reduction (59 %) in mainstream smoke nicotine delivery

• a reduction (38 %) in the nicotine/"tar" rati o
• an increase (21 %) in mainstream smoke pH
• a reduction (40 %) in the benzo[a]pyrene/TPM ratio
• a reduction (30 %) in the benz[a]anthracene/TPM ratio
• a reduction (48 %) in the phenoUTPM rati o
• a decrease (24%) in biological activity as measured in a mouse skin-painting
experiment
While the data on the flavorful aspects of nicotine per se in mainstream smoke are sparse,
data on the effect of various types of ammoniation of tobacco indicate that the levels of pyrazine
and several flavorful alkylpyrazines are increased significantly . Also, certain of the ammoniation
treatments reduce the level of nicotine in tobacco and its level in mainstream smoke not only
because of the reduced level of nicotine available for transfer from tobacco to mainstream smoke
but also because of its enhanced decomposition° to pyridine and alkylpyridines whose levels, like
those of pyrazine and the alkylpyrazines, are also increased in the smoke of many ammonia-
treated tobaccos7. If, however, the ammonia treatment of the tobacco moderately reduces the
nicotine level of the tobacco, the levels of the alkylpyridines in mainstream smoke from such
tobacco are not necessarily increased over those in the control tobacco smoke . Increasing the
reduction of the tobacco nicotine level by more prolonged ammoniation eventually results in a
decrease in the levels of alkylpyridines in the mainstream smoke, presumably because of the
paucity of their precursor .
Ammoniation of tobaccos with high sugar levels, e .g., flue-cured tobaccos with 15-20%
sugars, substantially increases the levels of allrylpyrazines in the mainstream smoke from such
tobaccos . Only a slight increase in mainstream smoke alkylpyrazines is observed with low sugar
tobaccos such as burley (sugar levels usually less than 2 %) .
The flavorful properties of pyrazines have been well documented over the years . They
0 Kaburaki Y, SuSawan S, Kobuhi U . and Doilara T (1970), Studies on the Composition of Tobacco Smoke . XIV . The Formation
of Pyridines in the Pyrolysta of Nicotine . J . AGR. CHEM. SOC . JApAN II.' 224-231 .
T areen CR, Martin JM, and Rodgman A(1976), Perwal communication on the effect of treatment of tobacco with ammonia or
various ammonium uln on levels of pyrazinea and pyridinw in ci ;arette smoke.
4
contribute significantly to the desirable flavor of a variety of foodstuffs, including tea and
coffee•, cocoa and chocolate, roasted peanuts10, roasted meats (beef, poultry, fish)", etc .
Table 2 lists some representative data on the effect of various ammoniation treatments
on the levels of various pyrazines and pyridines in mainstream smoke . In addition to the data
shown in Table 2, similar data on the increased mainstream smoke levels of pyrazines and
pyridines were obtained from tobaccos and/or tobacco stems subjected to a variety of other
ammonia treatments:
• the denicotinization of tobacco with ammonia and steam

• the denicotinization of tobacco with ammonia and an organic solvent
• the ammoniation of the RJRT proprietary reconstituted tobacco sheet
• the addition of ammonium salts (ammonium carbonate + ammonium bicarbonate
or diammonium hydrogen phosphate) to reconstituted tobacco sheet
• the addition of ammonium salts (ammonium carbonate + ammonium bicarbonate
or diammonium hydrogen phosphate) to a blend of tobaccos
0 Mafa JA and Sizer CE (1973), Pyrazinea In Food . A Review . J. AG1t . FOOD CSFAl. 21 : 27r30 .
0 Vac Fraa= M, Stein HS, and Tibbeaa MS (196E), Steam Volatile Coaadaieab of Roasted Coc°a Bana. J. AGR. FOOD CHEt.
16: 1005-1008 .
IE Newell IA, Mason ME, and Madock RS (1967), Precursors o['lypical .nd Atypical Roamed Feaaut Flavor . J. AG& FOOD CH17K
lS:767-772. -
II . A Reviev. J. AGR. FOOD CEnL 21: 22-30. tc,1MaYJAndSizerCE(1973),FyazieInod
TABLE 2. THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS AMMONIATION PROCESSES ON
THE LEVELS OF NICOTINE, PYRAZINES, AND PYRIDINES
IN MAINSTREAM SMOKE'=
% Difference from Control
NH3ICO2-
expanded Aue- Modifiedt
cured tobacco 19bossaa + l',anel PJlnr
vt o16oro 4 Sfr ACs vs
control vt vs control
moke Analvte 8u"ured soatrol RRnrton control Wbvraw Canef PJ@er
A!S "tar". rtleoNrte. and ammonia
nicotine•l"tar"• -30 -8 0 -14

ammoniab/"tar^ 547 77 ND 48
29
pH, averaye minimum 6 .98 vs 5 .67 5 .67 vs 5.73 5 .90 vs 5 .69 6 .00 vs 5.90
pH, avenpe maximum 7 .42 vs 5 .90 6 .29 vs 6.02 6 .30 vs 6 .02 6 .53 vs 6.20
pH, overall avera8e 7.20 vs 5 .79 5 .98 vs 5 .87 6 .10 vs 5 .85 6 .26 w 6.10
MS avrarJnea°
pycuine 236 38 52 93
pyrazine, 2-methyl- 345 19 57 96
pyrazine, 2,3-dimethyl- 436 32 68 95

pyrazine, 2,3,5-trlmethyl- 361 30 125 114
MS ev~idJnesd
pyrid'me, 2-methyl-• 141 30 $2 42
pyridine .2,3-dimethyi-r 34 33 44 83
• ms/ciyt b µ8lciyt
° Similar % differences between treated and control tobacco MSs were obtained for the following pyrszines : 2-ethylpyrazine ;
2,5- and 2,6-0imethylpyrazine ; 2-ethyl-S-metbylpy+&zJm
e Similar % differences between treated and control tobacco MSs were obtained for the following pyridines : pyddine ; 3- and
4-methylpyridine; 2- and 3-ethylpyridine ; 2,4-, 2,5-, and 2,6dimethylpyridwa
° 2-picoliAe r 2,3-lutidine
• AC • mibure of ammonium cuboate and bicarbonate
e Cs+ntd 1Mrw blend was modified with NHVCO~4xpanded tobacco and dianunonium hydro8en phosphate-treated stems to
simulste the Yaibero
12 Green CR, Mutin JM, and RodBaun A (1976), Personal communication on the effect of treatment of tobacco with ammonia or
various ammonium salts on levels of pyrazlnes and pyddines in ci8arette aaake .
6
"Free" (unprotonated) nicotinel"free" (unprotonated) ammonia
no method for "free" nicotine
method for "free" ammonia
Prior to the 1975 and 1976 reports by Sloan and Morie", several methods for the
determination of ammonia in cigarette smoke had been reported". However, as Sloan and
Morie noted, none of these earlier methods was suitable for the determination of "free"
(unprotonated) ammonia in cigarette smoke :
None of the published methods distinguished between ammoniam lon and free (unprotonated)
arnmonla.
From their analytical determination of ammonia in tobacco smoke by the use of an ammonia
electrode and the calculated fraction of "free" (unprotonated) ammonia vs pH, they noted :
Tfu aWrhnental -values for free ammonia agreed my well with the theoretical amounted
calculatul from total ammonia and pH of the smoke . . ?1ie oalcnlated free ammonia agreed with
the eperlmental value.
In fact, the investigators suggested that the puff-by-puff pH of cigarette smoke is dependent to
a great extent on the level of "free" ammonia in the puff :
T he Increase In pH wlth puff number is consistent with the Increase of free aaunonla . . .
Attempts to apply the technique successful with mainstream smoke ammonia to

mainstream smoke nicotine presented several problems :
• the unavailability of a nicotine electrode corresponding to the

ammonia electrode
• the difference in the physical nature of the two amines in
mainstream smoke aerosol, namely, ammonia is a highly water-
soluble mainstream smoke vapor-phase component whereas
nicotine is dissolved and/or suspended in an essentially water-
insoluble aerosol particle
• the differwee in contribution of the two amines to mainstream
smoke pH with the methods currently employed in mainstream
m Sloan CH and Moii . OP (1975), Medwd tor tb . Deteemin.doo of Unproloo.ted Ammonia in CiS.reue Smoke . 29t6 TOB . CHIIN.
RES. CONF., CaBep Puk MD: P.per No. 16; (1976), Deaeemin.tion of Unprotonated Ammonia In Whole CiSueae Smoke .
BEITR. TABAIYORSCH. d 362-365 .
14 Ayra CW (1969) Determin.tioa of Ammonia in Tobacco and Tobacco Smote . TALANTA 16: 10S.f-10t7; Co4ias PF, L.wrence
W W, and WiI1Lau JF (1972), Tide1 (Ammonia In C'g .rette Smote]. BE1TR. TABARFORBCH . 6: 167-172; Bcunoemann KD and
HotBo.na D, (1974), au Chromatographic Deteradadoo of Ammonia In Cilueae and Cij .r Smoke . 28& TOB. C1H!M . RES .
CONF., W{et¢ NCs Paper No . $3; Sloan CH and Mode OP (1974), Deteemin .Non of Ammonia In Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke
with an Ammonia Bieatrode . ANAL. CH1M. ACTA 69: 243-247 ; Btumem.m KD .nd Ho}fm .nn D(1975), Chemicd Studies on
Tobacco Smoke . 70QQV . <iu Chromacojrsp6ia Deteeminatioa of Ammonia In Cisareue and Ci ;ar Smoke . J. CHROMAT. SCi .
19: 159-163 .
7
smoke pH determination
the difference in absorption of ammonia and nicotine from
mainstream smoke vapor-phase and particulate phase, respectively,
when they contact the highly buffered fluids, e .g., saliva, coating
the surfaces of different parts of the respiratory tract
In its discussion of cigarette design and manufacture, the FDA criticizes the chemical
manipulation of tobacco to alter the pH of mainstream smoke .
• The treatment of tobacco products with basic compounds such as

ammonia, ammonium hydroxide, ammonium salts, or urea
compound, and its salts in tobacco products because :
Ammonia inaaasea the pH of the smoke and thereby enhances the absorption of
nicotine In the body." (Emphasis added : AR)
• The treatment of tobacco products with acids or acid-generating

casing materials (sugar, cocoa) :
Manufacturers also reduce harshness by routinely adding acids to tobacco to

loawer the pH of the snwke. (7f:eyJ also use conventional casing materials, such
as sugars and cocoa, to produce acids in the smoke and reduce harshness .'D
(Emphasis added : AR)
m Brunnemann KD and Hotl'mano D (1972), On the pH of Tobacco Smoke . 26th TOB . CHFM. RES. CONF., Williamsburg VA:
Paper No . 11 ; (1974), The pH of Tobacco Smoke. F'OOD COSMET. TOJQCOL.12: 115-124 .
m Bwnnemaat Im and Hoftmano D(1974), Gas ChromatoSrapbic Determinatwn of Ammonia In CiSareae and Cigar Smoke . 28tb
TOB. CEIFM. RE& CONF., ItdriS\ NCt Paper No. S3; (1975), Chemioai Studies on Tobacco Smoke . 70QC1V. Gas Chromato-
graphic Determination of Ammonia In Cigarette and Cigar Smoke . J . CHROMAT. SCL 13: 159-163 .
17
&unaamron KD, Hot6naann D, and Wynder EL (1973), Studiea on the Inhalability of Cigarette and Cigar Smoke . 27th TOB.
CHFM. RES. CONF., Winuton-S.lem NC: Paper No . 27 .
m AemitaSe AK and Turner DM (1970), Abaoeptlon of Nicodae In Cigarette and Cigar Smoke tbrouSL Orai Mueoa . . NATURE 226.•
1231-1232 ; ArmitaSe AK. Dollery CT, George CP, Hou.eaun TH, Lewia FJ, and Turner DM (1975), Absorption and Metabolism
of Nicotine from Cigarettes. BRIT. MED. J.197S nvl : 313-316 ; Armitaje AK, Dollery CT, HouaemaaTH, Kobner 8M, Leai.
FJ, and'Niner DM (1978), Absorption of Nicotine from Small CiSar . . CLIIN. PHARMACOL. THER. 29: 143-150.
m United States Food and Drug Admini .tratioa (FDA) (1993) Nicotine in Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco Products Is a Drug and
These Products are Nicotine Delivery Devices under the Federal Food, DruS, and Coenetio Act . US FDA DHHS : 1-326 (August):
250.
United States Food and Drug AdmWrtration (FDA) (1995) Nicotine In Cigarettes and Smokeless Tobacco Products Is a Drug and
These Products are Nicotine Delivery Devicea under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act . US FDA DHHS : 1-326 (August) :
232 .
Humectants such as glycerol and other polyols are used for two major reasons in tobacco
smoking products :
• To maintain the pliability of tobaccos during blending, cutting, and

cigarette fabrication in order to reduce fragmentation of the
tobaccos
• To aid in the retention of the moisture in the cigarette tobacco

blend during fabrication, shipping, shelf storage, etc .
A blend moisture level of 1246 is optimum for cigarette

fabrication, e, g. , cigarette firmness, production speed ; a moisture
level less than 12 % presents problems in cigarettte fabrication .
If the cigarette moisture content decreases below 12 % during

shipping, store shelf life, etc., the composition of the mainstream
smoke changes drastically : The per cigarette deliveries of "tar,"
nicotine, aldehydes and ketones, etc . increase markedly and the
cigarettes, because they are perceived as harsher (less smooth), are
considered unacceptable by the consumer .
The FDA noted :
Tobacco lndustry o„Q4ctals acknowledge that controlling moisture content is

essential to ensure that nicotine content [of the mainstream smoke] does not fall .
It should also be recognized that the "Tobacco industry officials"

cited by FDA were Philip Morris R&D personnel=' presenting a
review paper in symposium at the 32nd Tobacco Chemists'
Research Conference .
The FDA could have just as easily have phrased its stement as
follows : Tobacco industry officials acknowledge that controlling
moisture content is essential to ensure that nicotine content does
not rise.
If, as the FDA implies throughout its report, the cigarette

manufacturers wanted the consumer to receive more nicotine from
the cigarette, they would use less humectant so that blend moisture
would drop to a pre-calculated value, say 10 %, thus increasing
both the total per cigarette nicotine delivery and the per puff
iLn
~
~
21 DeBardeleben MZ, Clanin WE, and Oannon WF (1978), Role of CiQareqe Physical Characteristics on Smoke Composition . RECENT ,~
ADV. TOB . SCI. 4: 8S•111 . Sce 98 . ~
~
9 `°
00
nicotine delivery during smoking . The manufacturers make every
effort to select the correct humectant level so that the moisture
content of 12 % persists as long as possible .
• In its discussion of humectants, the FDA stated :
Casings often include a humectant, usually glycerine [sie] or a higher glycol,

which serves to keep the tobacco moist and less sensitive to changes in
humidtty. . .
Its statement about RJR's acknowledgment of its use of glycerol as

a humectant suggests that RJR was involved in something
nefarious :
RJR acknowledged using glycerine (sic] as a hurnectant . . .
Giycerol, used by RJR in its cigarette blends since the introduction

of the Camel, is a natural component of tobacc& . Propylene
glycol, used by some manufacturers, is not a natural-occurring
compound .
Humectants transfer from the humectant-treated tobacco to its

smoke. For a glycerol-treated cigarette, about 10-12 % of the
weight of the "tar" determined by the FTC method is glycerol ;
for filter-tipped cigarettes, the transfer is at the lower end of the
rangen.
In its analysis of the FTC data on sales-weighted average nicotine deliveries for 1982-
1991, the FDA wrotel' :
FDA. . . analyZed lr}/brmatton supplied by the FTC that was derhed from the FTC's database on
nicotine levels !n ctgarene" [sic] . . . (T/here ts an apparent tncrease in the sales-weighted FT1C
nicotine delivery rattngs, for all cigarettes, since 1982 (the earliest year for which the computer
database Is available).
To limit its discussion of nicotine delivery data only to data available from 1982 to 1991
indicates the lack of objectivity in the FDA's examination. Even though they may not be in the
22 Cundiff RH, Greeae aH, and Laureoe AH (1964), Column Elution of Humectants from Tobacco and Determination by Vapor
Chromatognphy. TOB. SCI. 8: 163-168 .
n Wynder EL and Hofi'mam D (1967), Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke : Sardiu In Esperimrnml CaicinogcnssLr . Academic Prea, New
York NY: 480482.
24 United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (1995) Nicotine in Cigarettea and Smokeleaa Tobacco Products Is a Drug and
These Products aro Nicotine Delivery Devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act . US FDA DHHS: 1-326 (August):
266-270 .
ss The database referred to deals with nleoNne levefs /n dganne smoke not Ncodne kvelr !n dganaesl
10
FTC computer database, much
additional data are available! FTC
data on nicotine deliveries have
been published since 196r .
Comparable data are available for
sales-weighted average "tar" and
nicotine deliveries from the mid-
1950sn. Even though data prior
to 1967 were not generated by the
FTC, they were generated by
analytical procedure which 1982 1984 L986 L988 1990
eventually formed the basis of the Ye.r
F'igure 1 . Sales-Weighted Nicotine and "Tar" Levels in
FTC procedures for the
Cigarette Smoke as % of 1956 Levels: Average of
determination of "tar" and All Brands, 1982-1991
nicotine in mainstream smoke.
Such data have formed the basis of
discussion by the U .S. Surgeon General', the National Cancer InstituteP and others of the
effectiveness of various cigarette design technologies in generating a "less hazardous" cigarette .
If the 1982 through 1991

values are compared to the 1956
nicotine deliveries rather than with 0 .3e
the 1982 data, an important fact 3 of 0 .36
1986
emerges: As shown in Figure 1, Levets
0 .34
even with the slight increase in
sales-weighted average nicotine 0 .32
deliveries between 1982 and 1991,
the values are less than 40% of
the 1956 value, ranging from 33 RUE 1984 1986 1988 1990
to 38% of the 1956 value, i.e., Year
between 1956 and 1982, the sales- Figure 2. Sales-Weighted Nicotine and "Tar" Levels in
Cigarette Smoke as % of 1956 Levels : Average of
weighted average nicotine delivery Alt Brands, 1982-1991
decreased about 67% ; between
1956 and 1991, it decreased about
26 Federal Trade Comcpissioa (1967), "Tar^ and Nicotine of the Smoke of S9 Variedes of Cigarettes . (November, 1%7) ; Federal Trade
Commission (1968), 'Tu" and Nicotine of the Smoke of 122 Varieties of C'sa[ettes .
r Wakeham H(1976), Sales Weighted Average Tar and Nicotine Deliveries of U .S . Cigarettes from 1957 to the Preseat . In Wynder
EL and Hecht SS (Bditon). Lung Cancer, UICC TECH. RPT. SERIES 2.f: 1S1-1S2. N
28 United Stetes Public Health Service (USPHS) (1979), S1+ioMng and IteaM . A Reporr of du Swryeon Oerteral DHEW Yabl . No. ~-'
(PHS) 79-50066; United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1981), flie lieaW Conaequenoer oj Smoktng . M changing FJ,
G7goreae. A Reporr ojthe Surgeon Oenewl . DHHS P.bl. No . (PHS) 81-S01S6. m
29 National Cancer Imtitute (1980), Report lYo . S. Toward Lea Boiardows CJgarstret . S&anmary: Four Sktn Palndng Bioaraays Ustng
Condenaaie, fhrn Erperimenta! qgarraer . DHEW FtiW . (NIH) (&ptember 1980). ~
J
m
11
have been published since 1967'" .
Comparable data are available for
nicotine deliveries from the mid-
1950s". Even though data prior
to 1967 were not generated by the
FTC, they were generated by
analytical procedure which
eventually formed the basis of the
FTC procedures for the
determination of "tar" and 1992 19" 1996 19ee 1990
nicotine in mainstream smoke. Year
Such data have formed the basis of +''bM 1. Sdes-Weighted Nicotine And "Ter" Levels in
discussion by the the U . S. All Brands, 1982-1991
Surgeon GeneraY`, the National
Cancer Institute'° and others of
the effectiveness of various cigarette design technologies in generating a "less hazardous"
cigarette. '
If the 1982 through 1991

values are compared to the 1956
nicotine deliveries rather than with 0 .38
. r n • Ir• I
x els~l/w~
the 1982 data,, an important fact .36
0
. ,
emerges: As shown in Flgure 1, L19,56.vt1s
0
0 .34
even with the slight increase in
0 . - -&
sales-weighted average nicotine 0 .31 0 0 , _.
deliveries between 1982 and 1991,

the values are less than 40% of I I I I I I I I I I
the 1956 value, ranging from 33 1982 1904 190i 1990
to 38% of the 1956 value; l.e., Yaar
between 1956 and 1982, the sales- F%= 2. Salae-Waghted Niootine aod "Tar" Levels in
weighted average nicotine de2ivery All Brmds, 1982-1991
decreased about . 67%, between
1956 and 1991, it decreased about
~ Fedeal Tnda Comndaioo (1967) .'Tu" Aod Niootina of 16. Smob of S9 Vudbtka of C4aeMa . (Novsmbw,1967) ; Federd Tcade
Coomdaion (1963),'Tu" aod Nicodpa ohfw aabob of 121 VaeiMi . . o(CiF.raaes.
27 Wakehanl H(1976) . Sda Wei=Med Av.rys Tar aod Moadoa D.Hv.riea o[ 11 .S. CiptWea fian 1957 to t6e Fce .ea. In Wynder
SlL and Heoht 83 (BdhM) . L+owS Cmkur, UICC TBCH. RF'1'. SFRIES 2.f: 151-131.
21 vnhee Sta/es Fublio Hahh seevk. (UsPHS) (1974), Sea6bls ed BoWIt. A Jtspert q/d,e SY/iean l7enawt . DHEW PoW. No.
MIS) W40066; Ua3ted statea FubBo EIeaph savb . (I13pHS) (19t1), fl1t HsakA CanasqMSeca of SYwkina . ifu arangi+la
aaarra. A RspeK q/dk SraFson Qensrol. DUBS h4t. No. (PH0 t1deL{ f.
29 Nadooal CaaoeAmtiau . (1980, Revw* nw. $. toward Lsa a=ntorr apnpta. Syalnlory: FoNW skln Pandna Bloa:.ayi v.fn;
CondsnsauJ)na. Bxperinard ajQnan. DHEW F.ltl. (NW) (Sepqir60r MO) .
11
62% . Such decreases hardly denote a concerted effort by the U .S. cigarette manufacturers to
"hook" the consumer, as claimed by the FDA, on cigarette smoke nicotine by supposedly
increasing the exposure to mainstream smoke nicotine . By suitable selection of coordinates in
the plotting of these data, the appearance of the sales-weighted average nicotine increase between
1982 and 1991 may by accentuated or minimized, cf. FIgures 1, 2, and 3. Figure 3 puts the
nicotine deliveries from 1956 through 1991 vs the 1956 sales-weighted average value in proper
perspective.
Numerous technologies
introduced sequentially from the
mid-1950s to the late 1960s were . .tr o • _ _
incorporated into cigarette design Mc~tIM
to control MS delivery and

composition. All are considered
to contribute to what some
authorities, even some with
pronounced anti-tobacco
sentiments, have characterized as
a "less hazardous" cigarette when U6~ 1 s 1984 r .r 3lea lfat - 1!!0
included in cigarette design (the .
U.S. Surgeon General'0, the Figure 3. Sales-Weighted Nicotine and "Tar" Levels in
National Cancer Institute", All Branda, 1982-1991
Gori'=).
These technologies include (see FYgure 4) :
• tobacco blend and weight

• tobacco rod length and circumference
• filter tips (material type and additives)
• processed tobaccos (reconstituted. tobacco sheet, expanded tobacco)
• air dilution (increased paper porosity, filter tip perforations) .
Some of the technologies were developed for economic reasons but later were found to
have an effect on cigarette mainstream smoke delivery and composition that were in accord with
the definition of a "safer" or "less hazardous" cigarette . An example of this was the first
30 United States Public Health Servke (USPHS) (19?9), S5noltng and Rsattb . A Rsport qf du Swgson CknsroG DREW Pribi . No .
(PHS) 79-50066 ; United States Public He .Uh Service (USPHS) (19a1) . flre 8seltlr Coerequanea q/S+Moxing . 7he Q+miging
agamu. A Repoit q/ab. dYrrgson Owau,nl. DHHS F.bl. No. (PHS) S1dGLSi.
FE Nadonal Cancer Tnatitute (1980), Rsporr nw .1. Toward Leu 8atnrdow agwrap. .Slonmaiy: Four Skn Patndng Bloasaays Uring
Qondenaaufi+om Srpcdmerual aganau. DHEw Pubi . QV>fl) (Sepasber 1980) .
n Ood OB (19E0), i,eW Hazardous Cigarottes : Tbeory and Pr.ctice.la God OB aaid Book FO (Editora), A $0 aganaet Banbury
Report 3, Cold Spria; Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spriaj Harbor NY : 261-279; (1980, A Sununary Appraisal . In Oori GB and Boot
FO (Editors), A StiJs.agoreast Baabury Report 3, Cold Sprins Harbor Laboratorp, Cold SptioS Harbor NY : 3S3-3S9 .
12
successful incorporation of 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
reconstituted tobacco sheet into 50 3 .0
cigarette design in 1953 by R .J. 45
Reynolds Tobacco Company with Mb• !!p . ~
2 .5 '
40 Heooortitut .d 'lb6aoso 8do.i
the Winston. The Winston was P&yp' Aad11LvM
also the first highly successful 35 P.o.r Poro.tey
iqandod loDaooo
filter-tipped cigarette . Other v.ntllaltoo 2.0
30
technologies were developed and ~
introduced by the cigarette 25 1 .5 ~

manufacturers in an attempt to 20
respond directly to a variety of ~
1 .0
15 1. `• .y.. . ... {
smoking-health claims .
t 10 -- Tar
Nieotine 0.5 x
The chronology of 5
introduction of these technologies
0 1 1 I I 1 1 . I 0.0
is noted in Flgure 4 . Over the 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984
years, use of these technologies in
concert and to various degrees in F'igare 4 . "Tar" and Nicotine Deliveries, Sales Weighted
Average Basis
cigarette design has provided the
consumer with a great variety of
products whose number has increased from about a dozen in the mid-1950s to several hundred
presently. It should be remembered that the cigarette is a system : All of these technologies
used in cigarette design are interactive . i, e., inclusion of or change in the level of use of any
particular technology may require other adjustments in the cigarette design to maintain certain
attributes acceptable to the consumer .
Within a decade of the introduction of the successful filter-tipped Mnston with its
reconstituted tobacco sheet component, all U .S. cigarette manufacturers were using reconstituted
tobacco sheet, either in-house developed or purchased from a supplier, in their products . Filter-
tipped cigarettes had escalated from about 1 .3 96 of the U . S. market in 1953 to 64 % in 1965" .
During the period 1955-1965, the sales-weighted "tar" and nicotine deliveries decreased by 40
and 48 %, respectively . Since filter-tip ventilation had not been discovered and utilized in
cigarette design, compensation by cigarette smokers for such a decrease (48%) in nicotine intake
was almost an impossibility .
In addition to reducing the •`tar" and nicotine deliveries, what else did the incorporation
of reconstituted toba3eoco sheet into the cigarette blend accomplish? During the same period,
1955-1965, the specific tumorigenicity of cigarette smoke condensates from commercial
cigarettes containing increasing levels of reconstituted tobacco sheet decreased" as did the
" ari .e VN (1954) . Market Growth of Reducod Tar Ci=areaea . RECENT ADV.1'OS. SCL 10: 4-14 .
34 Wynder EL and Hotfnunn D(1955), Reduction of'Ylimoripeoioity of CiSaieete Smote . An Bxperimeahi Approach . J. AM. MED.
A.4SOC .19I: aE-94.
13 '
cigarettes containing increasing levels of reconstituted tobacco sheet decreased" as did the
benzo[a]pyrene per mg of smoke condensateu.
eo
In a continuation of their mouse skin-
painting studies'a, Wynder et al ." examined the 70
effect of application of lower and lower annual y„
doses of mainstream cigarette smoke condensate ~
on tumor production in skin-painted mice
. They ~50 reported that skin painting of mice with a total 40
annual dose of 10 g/mouse produced papilloma in '
about 60 % of the mice, but only a small ~'opercentage (< 1096) of papilloma-bearing animals
(no carcinoma-bearing) animals was observed K 20
when the total annual amount of cigarette smoke 10
condensate applied was less than 5 g/mouse .
Further reduction of the annual dose to did not ° L : -A-----L
3 . 5 7
----
e a o,o
J
yield any papilloma- or carcinoma -bearing mice Graav of Ciàrette Smoke/Nouse/Year

(see Fjgtu'e S) . FIgure S. Relationship of Tumor Yield and
Dose (Wynder et al., 1957)
Wynder and his colleagues used these data
as the basis for their statements that reduction of the "tar" yield of cigarettes by about 40-50%
would produce substantial reductions in the incidence of respiratory cancer in cigarette smokers :
. . .A.lthough It is d{fficult to estimate a comparable exposure leuel for man, the human data in line
with the animal data Indicate that a reduction in total tar exposure will be followed by a decrease
in tumorformation. . . Measures that can succeed in the tar exposure of man include thefollowing :
l . More e~, jj`'adive Jtltration. lt seems feasible to produce a Jilter that will remove 40 per
cent of the tar from a given cigarette and still allow the cigarette to maintain a satisfactory
pressure drop and jlauvr .
2. Mod~'ication In the types of tobacco so that the blend used Is as low as possible in
tar1t [sic] and nicotine content. . .
. . .It may be predicted that if the average smoker were erposed to only ha{f the amount of tobacco
tar to which the smoker of ngular-siz.at cigarettes ts now [1957] exposed, his cancer risk will be
~ Wyeder EL ud Hof6mtm D(1965), Reduction of Tumotigenicity of Cigarette Smoke . An Experimental Approach . J. AM. MED .
ASSOC .192: Es-94 .
u Hotriaann D and Rathkanp (7 (1966), Unpublished data cited In Wyader EL and HotYmana D(1967), Tobacco and Tobacco S7moke :
Studlet In S+rperlrnrntal CaMeogenesfi. Academic Press, Piew York NY: S31-S23 .
36 Wynder EL, aralum EA, and Cronin;er AB (1953), Study on the Esperimerual Production of Cancer with Tobacco Tar . PROC.
AM. ASSOC. CANCER RES. 1: 62-63; Bxperimenual Production of Carcinoma with Cigarette Tar . CANCER RES.13: 833-864;
Experimental Production of Carcinoma with Cigarette Tar. II. Teata with Different Mouse Strains . CANCER RES. 1J: 443-448;
Wynder 84, Lupberger A, and l}renror C(1936), 8sperimental Production of Cancer with Cigarette Tar : Strain Differences . BRIT.
J. CANCER 10: S07-S09 ; Wynder EL and Wright OF (I9S7), A Study of Tobacco Carciaogeaesi . . I . The Primary Frac6ona .
CANCER lo.• 235-271 . -
37 Wynder BL,1{opf P, and Ziegler H(1957), Dosa Response with Cigarette Tar . PROC. AM. ASSOC . CANCER RES. 2(3): 261 ;
A Study of Tobacco Careinogenesia . II . Dose-Response Studies . CANCER 10: 1193-1200 .
X Tobacco does not contaia "tar ."
14
sign{ficantly reduced. Any measure designed to thus reduce man's exposure to tobacco tar whether
through modtfieation of the tobacco or the eigarette, or through more effeetive filtration, can
sign{/ieantly c+ontribute to the decrease in risk
The data from these dose-response study (and the threshold limit value for cigarette
smoke condensate) were subsequently reported and their pertinence to the human smoking
situation -and cigarette design were discussed many times by Wynder and Hoffmann" . E.g.,
they stated in 1964 and and again in 1967 :
It is apparent that a redudion of tumorigenic components can be most readily accomplished by

reducing the total amount of smoke condensate . . .to which one is ezposed.
From the results of additional biological studies, Wynder and Hoffmann'° concluded :
It Is apparent. .,,from laboratory studies . . . that exposure to tobacco smoke condensate and tumor
yield are quantitatively eorrelated
Similar dose-response findings were subsequently reported from the National Cancer Institute's
massive 10-year "less hazardous-cigarette" study involving tests on cigarette smoke condensates
from nearly 100 experimental cigarettes and over 30 control cigarettes and the Kentucky 1R1
Reference Cigarette (Gori", National Cancer Institute') .
How did the introduction (see FIgure 4) of the various cigarette design technologies
speak to the suggestions on "tar" reduction? Table 3 discusses the various technologies
acknowledged by various anti-tobacco smoking investigators and institutions as contributing
significantly to "less hazardous" cigarettes . In addition to the beneficial reduction sought by
Wynder and others in mainstream smoke "tar" delivery, most of the technologies also produced
a decrease in mainstream smoke nicotine delivery . This reduction in nicotine delivery occurred
between 1957 and 1965, even though as late as 1964, the U . S. Surgeon General commented on
the toxicity of nicotine as follows :
Mhe chronic toxicity of nicotine in quantities absorbed from smoking and other methods of
a9 Wynder EL and Hot6n .na D(1962), Studiee with the aamoua and Paztieulate Phaae of Tobacco Smote . PROC. AM. ASSOC.
CANCER RES. !(I): 373 ; (1963), Eia experimenteUer Beitag wr Tabatrauc6kaaaerogeaeee . DEZPr.11ZD. WCHNSCHR. 8g:
623-628 ; (1964), FVerimental Tobacco CarcioogeoeaL . ADV. CANCER RES. d: 2t9-4S3: see 372-373 ; (1967), Tobacco and
Tobacco b5noke: Studia In Bxpetimentd CarobwgenesU . Academic Press, New Yort NY : S44-S03 .
40 Wynder EL and Hoffmaan D (1965), Reductioe of Tumorigenicity of Cigarette Smoke . An F.xperimeatal Approach . J. AM . MED.
ASSOC . 192: E8-94.
a ()od OB (Editor) (1976), Report No .1. Toward Less Hazardous Qganrttu . 71te Fiat set qjErpertmmwt l3garettes . DREW Publ .
No . ¢YIH) 76-905; (1976), Report No. 2. Toward Leaa Hazardous Agantus . lhs Second Set ojFrperirnenta/ Qgamus . DHEW
Publ. No. 0iIH) 76-1111 ; (1977), Report No. 3. Toward Less Hazardous Qgantus . 71:e 7ltird set oJSrperinienul Gtgamus .
DREW Publ . No. (NIH) 77-1280; (1980, Report No. 4. Toward ltst Hazardous Qgannu . Me Fowrh Set of Fxpuimmtai
Qgarette. . DHEW Pabl. (MS) Mareh (1980).
n National Cancer Institute (1980), Report No . S. Toward Leu Hazardous Qganttes . Sanunary: Four sk/n PainNng Bioassays Osing
Condentate from F.rperlmtntal Glgannes. DHEW Publ. (NIH) (September 1980).
15
signtficantly reduced . Any measure designed to thus reduce man's exposure to tobacco tar whether
through modification of the tobacco or the cigarette, or through more effectivefiltration, can
signiftcantly contribute to the decrease in risk
The data from these dose-response study (and the threshold limit value for cigarette
smoke condensate) were subsequently reported and their pertinence to the human smoking
situation and cigarette design were discussed many times by Wynder and Hoffmann'9 . E.g.,
they stated in 1964 and and again in 1967 :
It is apparent that a reduction of tunwrigenic components can be most readily accomplished by

reducing the total amount of smoke c»ndensate . . .to which one is exposed.
From the results of additional biological studies, Wynder and Hoffmanni0 concluded :
It is apparent. ., from laboratory studies. . . that exposure to tobacco smoke condensate and tumor
yield are quantitatively oorrelated.
Similar dose-response findings were subsequently reported from the National Cancer Institute's
massive 10-year "less hazardous-cigarette" study involving tests on cigarette smoke condensates
from nearly 100 experimental cigarettes and over 30 control cigarettes and the Kentucky 1R1
Reference Cigarette (Gori", National Cancer Institute'=) .
How did the introduction (see FIgure 4) of the various cigarette design technologies
speak to the suggestions on "tar" reduction? Table 3 discusses the various technologies
acknowledged by various anti-tobacco smoking investigators and institutions as contributing
significantly to "less hazardous" cigarettes . In addition to the beneficial reduction sought by
Wynder and others in mainstream smoke "tar" delivery, most of the technologies also produced
a decrease in mainstream smoke nicotine delivery . This reduction in nicotine delivery occurred
between 1957 and 1965, even though as late as 1964, the U .S . Surgeon General commented on
the toxicity of nicotine as follows :
[TJhe chronic toxicity of nicotine in quantities absorbed from smoking and other methods of
39 Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1962), Studies with the Qa .eow and Particulate Phase of Tobacco Smoke . PROC. AM. ASSOC.
CANCER RES. 3(I): 373; (1963), Bia axperimeateUer Beitnj zur Tabakraue6kanzero8ene.e . DEUT. MED. WCHNSCHR. 86:
623-628 ; (1964), Experimental Tobacco Carotoogenwia . ADV. CANCER RES. g: 249-453 : see 372-373 ; (1967), Tobacco and
Tobacco s+noke: Sadiu fn Lsperkenui CarMogenesls . Academic Press, New York NY : 504-505 .
p Wynder EL and Hoffmana D (1965), Reduction of'i5imorigeaieity of C'Wrette Smoke . An Experimental Approach . ,/. AM. MED.
AS.SOC.192 : 88-% .
41 Ooci OB (Editor) (1976), Report JVo . 1 . Toward Lers Razanfow agantau. M F1rst set qJBcperbuntal agaroau . DHEW Publ.
No. (MH) 76-905 ; (1976), Report /Vo. 2. Toward Less RotArdoas aganau . 7/u Second Set of Fxpenlmental aganaes . DHEW
Publ. No. (NIH) 76-1111 ; (1977), Report JYo. !. Towod Less Razasdou agamui. 71u 77iin! Set of 8rputmental agarraes.
DHEW Pobl. No. (NIH) 77•1280 ; (1980), Report No. 4. Toward Less Hazardous agansaa . 7/u Founh Set of 8spsrimenro!
aganaes. DHEW Pob1. (NIH) MareL (1980) .
n National Cancer LDtitute (1980), Report No . S. Towanf Leu Hazardous agarrttes . Sunwwry : Four Skin Paindng Bloarsays Using
CondensateJhvm F.xperimental aganats. DHEW Yobl. (NIS) (September 1980) .
15
tobacco use Is very low and probably does not represent any important health hazard . . ." ?Tu
evidence. . .supports a conclusion that the chronic toxicity {fniootine in amounts ordinarily obtained
In common forms of tobacco use Is very low Indced . . ." [TJhe chronic toxicity of nicotine In
quantities absorbed from snmking and other methods of tobaecn use is very low and probably does
not represent a significant health problem`5 .
As noted previously, by 1965, several of the design technologies succeeded in reducing

the "tar" delivery by 40%, the goal sought by Wynder . However, the decrease did not stop
there. Introduction of additional technologies reduced the sales-weighted average "tar" delivery
52% from the 1955 value . Eventually, the sales-weighted average "tar" delivery was only about
33 % of the 1955 value, i . e., a 67% reduction! When the anti-tobacco smoking group realized
the tobacco industry could provide the consumer with cigarettes at almost any specified "tar"
delivery, criticisms turned from "tar" to other factors :
• Flavora,n{,g : Since the lowered "tar" cigarettes were assumed to contain additional
quantities of flavorant formulations, the fate of flavorants during the smoking process
became a point of contention, i.e., did the flavorants generate undesired pyrolysis
products during the smoking process? This question was primarily triggered by the Philip
Morris advertisements of the new flavor technology applied to the Merit16 .
A comparison of the mutagenicities (Salmonella typhlmurium) of the mainstream smoke

from a cigarette blend with no flavorants, no casing materials, and no humectants vs
smoke from the same blend with normal flavorant and casing/humectant levels vs the
smoke from the same blend with normal casing/humectant levels plus 10 times the
normal flavorant levels revealed no differences attributable to the flavorants . The
humectants, by their dilution of the 'tar", diminished the mutagenicity of the mainstream
smoke.
• 7ter- ,p ventilation and compensation „for nicotine : Despite the fact that filter-tip
ventilation provided remarkable control of "tar" delivery, this technology was criticized
because the smoker supposedly could block the ventilation holes and increase intake of
"tar" and nicotine to "compensate" for the lowered "tar" and nicotine deliveries .
Nothing is said about the apparent lack of "compensation" for nicotine during the years
(1955-1970) when "tar" and nicotine deliveries were reduced by more than 50% .
Nor was much said about any nicotine problem when several noted investigators - as
43 United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1964), SYnoktna and Healrh . Repon of rhe Advt+ory Comndaee w ehe Surgeon (3eneral
of the Public Health Savtce. DHEW Pohl. No . (PSS) 1103. See 32.
K United States Public Health Service (USPHS) (1964), SSnoktna and Realih . lieport of du .ldviaory CoeuMlaee to the Surgeon General
of dhe Public Health Servlee . DHEW Yobl. No . M 1103 . See 74.
LS United Statee Public Health Service (USPHS) (1964). &nokfna and Neateh. Report q fthe Advtiory Caemlaee so dhe Swgeon General
of the Public Health Service. D1IEW Pabl. No. (PHS) 1103 . See 73.
46 Uoyd RA (1978), Personal communication on Nertt research . Detailed exanoination of the Merir ciSarette with particular emphasis
on the flavorant technolo8y revealed that the teehnolo8y used differed little from that employed on the 70-mm unfiltered Came! .inoe
1913 .
16
recently as 1980 - proposed that cigarettes should be designed to deliver further reduced
levels of "tar" and carbon monoxide but with nicotine deliveries either unchanged or
only slightly reduced . E.g., Russell and coworkers suggested'7 :
G, ~~low-tar, low CO, but meditrm-, rather than low-, nicotine cigarette might
ty,~-~ -reduce tar and CO intake more than occurs with low-tar, low-CO, low-nicotine
cigarettes
and
Finally, a case will be made for a medlran-nkwtine, low-tar, low-earbon

monoxide (CO) eigarette . . . (emphasis added: AR]
•Environrnental tobacco,srnoke : Switch the criticism from the smoker and supposed self-
contamination to the smoker and his purported contamination of others in the room .
47 Russell MAH, Wilson C, Fatel UA, Cole PV, and Feyenbend C (1973), Comparison of the Effect on Tobacco Consumption and
Carbon Monoxide Absorption of Chae" to HigL and Low Nicotine Cigaeettee . BRiT. MED. J.1973 nv): S 12; Russell MAH,
Cole PV, Idle MS, and Adama L (1975), Carbon Monoxide Yie1ds of Cigarettes and Their Relation to Nicotine Yield and Type of
Filter. BRIT. MED. J. 197f (Jd): 71 ; Russell MAS (1976), Low Tar, Medium-Nicotine Ciganttea : A New Approach to Safer ~
Smoldn; . BRIT. MED. J. 1976 il): 1430; (1980, Riat Raductioo Achievementa and Future Dinoctions . In l)ori GB and Bock FO ~
(Sditon), A Sq/e (aganae t Banbury Reporr 3, Cold Spt4ng Hatbor Laboratory, Cold Spt4aB Harbor NY : 157-177 ; (1980), The Case ~-'
for Medium-Nieotine, Low-Tar, Low Caebon Monoxide Ciganttea . In God OB and Boet Fa (Editors), A Sq/e Qganttef Bonbury ~
Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 297-310. ~
V
17 00
0 .075
0 .070
0 .065
NIT
Ratie
0 .060 s
0 .005
I I I I I I I I I
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 L980 L986 1990 1995
Year
I'ìgUl^8 G . Sales-Weighted Avetage Nicotine/Tar Ratios
18
0
• suggestions by investigators such as Russell, Jarvik, and others that the design of a
"safer" cigarette should involve the substantial reduction of "tar" delivery and either
maintenance of the nicotine delivery at the level it was prior to manipulation of the "tar"
delivery or only involve a slight reduction of the nicotine delivery .
a Ruueli MAH, Wilson C, Patet UA, Coie PV, and Feycnbeod C (1973), Compatiwn of the Effect on Tobacco Consumption aad
Cacbon Monoxide Absorption of Changing to HiSh and Low Nicotine CiSareae . . BRIT. MED. J.1973 pv) : S 12 ; Ruaeell MAH,
Cole PV, Idle MS, and Adama L(1975), Carbon Monoxide Yields of CiSarettea and Their Relation to Nicotine Yield and Type of
Filter . BRIT . MED . 11975 nU) : 71 ; Rw .ell MAH (1976), Low Tar, Medium-Nicotine Cigarettes : A Nea Approach to Safer
Smoking . BRIT. MED. J. 1976 p): 1430 ; (1980, iG.k-Reduction Achievements and Future Diiectan.. In C3ori (3B and Bock FO
(Editors), A Sq/e Glgarrae t Banbury Report 3, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold SprLV Harbor NY : 157-177; (1980), The Case
for Medium=Nicotine, L9w+ Tar, Low Carbon Monoxide Cigarettes . In flod oB and Boct FQ (Bditon), A Safe Ctgarsuef Banbury
Reporr 3, Cold SprinY Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 297-310.
19
j
c :lfdanicWcotn-3.fda
TABLE 3 . CIGARETTE DESIGN . TECHNOLOGIES

Effect
Cigarette Design on MS
TwmlQgx Qrigjpgl Goal _u_&Muent Findin¢s Nicotine
• blend of flue- • more consumer acceptable MS • TPM° less than that from an decrease
cured, burley, than that from an all-flue- all-flue-cured or all-oriental
oriental, and cured or all-oriental tobacco cigarette
Maryland cigarette specific tumorigenicity of CSC
tobaccos' from American blend less than
that from all-flue-cured or all-
oriental tobaccos
• filter tip° • esthetics (no tobacco • as efficiency of filter tip was decrease
fragmenta in mouth) increased, MS TPMb dec-
• TPM` reduction reased
• reconstituted ~ economics (tobacco leaf stem • as level of RTS was inc- decrease
tobacco sheet constitutes 20-25 96 of the reased, the MS TPM" dec-
(RTS)a purchased leaf weight ; prior to reased
1953, stems at R .J . Reynolds • specific tumorigenicity of CSC
Tobacco Company were decreased as RTS level in
discarded, sold as fertilizer, or blend was increased
processed to recover nicotine • TPM° PAHs decreased as RTS
for sale to chemical company level in blend was increased
that manufactured a nicotine- • in some instances, MS NNAs
based insecticide) and TSNAs increased as RTS
level of blend increased
• cigarette paper • to ensure the cigarette paper • slight decrease in TPM" with slight
additives char line preceded the tobacco increased use of some ciga- decrease
blend char line during the rette paper additives, a.g .,
burning of the cigarette citrate
• air dilution via • TPM` reduction • TPM' reduction proportional slight
cigarette paper to cigarette paper porosity decrease
porosity • reduction in VP component
deliveries proportional to
cigarette paper porosity
• filter-tip additives
+ improved fabrication of filter- • filter-tip additives (plasti- decrease
• triacetin, tip rods cizers) such as triacetin
carbowax, etc . selectively removed compo-
nents found primarily in the
MS VP as well as components
partitioned between the VP
and PP, e.g., phenols, VNAs
0
Table 3 (Continued) :
Effect
Cigarette Design on MS
TechnoloQV Original Goal Subsequent Findings Nico jpg
• carbon • reduction of MS VP •"carbon-filter" off-taste decrease

components (HCN, acrolein, eventually became unaccep-
acetaldehyde, acetone) table to the consumer
reported to be ciliastatic in tn • slight decrease in TPM°
vitro studies delivery : decrqase dependent
on filter-tip construction
(compartmoatalizod carbon,
carbon-impregnated cellulose
acetate fibers, etc .)
• processed tobacco
• denicotinization • reduction of nicotine level in • increase in levels of certain decrease
tobacco flavorful compounds, e.g .,
py~~
• expansion• f • reduction of per cigarette • reduction in TPMb delivery, decrease
TPM° delivery plus reduction reduction in levels of
of levels of allegedly harmful PAHs/mg TPMb, reduction in
components levels of several allegedly
• economics (the most expensive harmful VP components, e .g.,
item in a cigarette is the CO, HCN, acrolein
tobacco; any reduction in • reduction of specific
weight/cigt is reflected tumorigenicity of CSC
economically)
• air dilution via • reduction of MS TPMb plus • reductions of TPM° and VP decrease
filter-tip reduction of MS levels of VP components proportional to %
ventilatiod components (CO, NO, HCN, air dilution
etc.)
' This blend of tobaccos, the so-called American blead, was introduced by RJ . Reynolds Tobacco Co. in the C<onel cigarette
in 1913; eventually the American blend was used In cigareaes througLout the world .
b TPM - FfC "tar" + nicotine; WTPM - wet TPM - FTC'4ar•• + nicotine + water .
° Winrton, Introduced by RJ. ReynoW. Tobacco Company In 1933 . was the first tUter-tipped cigarotte to command a
signitican anarket share .
• In 1953, RJ. Reynolds Tobacco Company used its ln-house RTS In the newly Introduced NRnrten blend ; RTS use eventually
extended to other RJRT bead. (Camel, CavaUer7 ; by 1960, all U.S . cigarette as.aufacwrers wero incoeporatiqg an RTS in
their products.
• In 1965, R .I. Reynolds Tobacco Company reported the development of the first expansion peooeu applicable to tobacco
lamia .e; previously reported expansion processes were effective only with tobacco steaas . Expanded tobacco was Included in
RJRT products during and after 1965 .
t Incorporation of expanded tobacco and filter-tip ventilation in cigareue design permitted the generadon of cigarettes whose
"tar" delivery ranged 5om 0 . 1 to 10 mg.
AbbnWmiona:
CSC ~ cigarette solote condensate RTS - reconstituted tobacco abeet

MS ~ mainstream smoke TPM - total particulate matter
NNA • N-nitrosamine VNA - volatile N-nitrosamine
PP ~ particulate phase VP • vapor pbaae
In his 1979 .report, the U .S. Surgeon General, citing data present by Wynder and Hecht',
listed the major technologies that could be used in the design of cigarettes and classified their
effectiveness in the design of so-called "safer" or "less hazardous" cigarettes2 . Table 4,
adapted from the 1979 Surgeon General's report, lists each of these technologies and its
effectiveness in reducing per cigarette mainstream smoke "tar", mainstream smoke nicotine,
mainstream smoke carbon monoxide, and mainstream smoke benzo[a]pyrene, deliveries as well
as its effectiveness in reducing the tumorigenicity (mouse-skin painting) of mainstream cigarette
smoke condensate and in vitro mainstream smoke ciliatoxicity . Also indicated in Table 4 are the
tobacco industry members who originated the various technologies, particularly those considered
highly effective and which were used in 1979 in marketed products and are still used, I .e.,
cellulose acetate filtration, reconstituted tobacco sheet, air dilution via paper porosity, expanded
tobacco . The FDA in its 1995 discussion' of nicotine essentially ignores the years of effort
involved in developing these technologies and their effectiveness in reducing mainstream smoke
yield including nicotine delivery .
The categorization of the effectiveness of the various cigarette design technologies as highly
signiflcant, signtficant, insigniftcant, etc . is not that of members of the Tobacco Industry but of
institutions and investigators characterized by their anti-tobacco sentiments . These include
institutions such as the National Cancer Institute, and anti-tobacco smoking authorities such as
the U.S. Surgeon General', Wynder and Hecht', Wynder and Hoffmann', and Gori et al .'
I Wynder EL and Hecht SS (Bditora) (1476),1ung Cancer. UICC TECH. REPT. SERIES 2S: 138 .
2 United Statea Public Health Service (USPHS) (1979) . S+noAing and Reald:. A Report of the swgeon Cknernl . DHEW Pabl. No.
(PHS) 79-50066 . See Chapter 14, Table 26.
3 United States Food and Dnig Admiaiatratioa (FDA) (1995) Niootlm in Cigarettew and Smokeless Tobacco Products Is a Dn :B and
Theme Productu are Nicotine Delivery Devicea under the Federal Food, Dnt=, and Co .metic Act. US FDA DHHS: 1-326 (August).
0 National Cancer Institute (1980), Reporr No. 3. Toward Lesa Razardow aganaes . SUonmary: Four Sxin Palnting Bloaasays Using
Condensatefian Espe>imenml aganrtei . DHEW Frbl. (NN) (Septsber 1980.
© United State . Public Health Service (USPHS) (1979), Sinoling and Real& A Report of rhe Surgeon Gcnerol . DHEW Pabl . No.
(PHS) 79-50066 . See C6aptar 14, Tabb 26 ; United Suta Public Heahb Service (USPHS) (1981), 7he Realth Consequences of
&noking. 7he a:anging agaretre. A Report of the Swgeon GeneroL DHHS FttW. No. (PHS) 81-30156.
6 Wynder EL and Hecht SS (Bditoc .) (1976), Waj Cancer . UICC TECH . REPT. SERIES 2.f: 138 .
I Wynder EL and Hoffimam D(1964), 8:cperimental Tobacco Carcloo8eaeai.. ADV. CANCER RES. g: 249-433 ; (1965), Reduction
of Tumorijeaiaity of Cijantte amotce . An Bx#eeiaaatal Approach. J. AM. MED. ASSOC. 1P2: 88-94; (1967) . Tobacco md
Tobacco SMoke: Slardteu bt Zperta.attal Ca>tclnogeneaL . Academic Press, NeMr York NY ; Wynder EL and HofGnann D(Bditors)
(1968), Toward a lsa Rarafyt agantte . NATL. CANCER INST. MONOG1tAPH 28.
0 God aB (Editor) (1976), Report A6 1. Towaid Leu Roundour agorata . flie Plrtt Set oJ6xPertmenwl agaretra . DHEW Pobl .
No. (NIH) 76A03i <Iorf oB (Editor) (1976), Report 1Vo . 2. ToMand l.ur Rarartlow aganaa. Tlre Second Set q/Sxpe>rinenral
agareaa. DREW Fubl. No. (NIH) 76-1111; tioti GB (1976), Approaches to the Reduction of Total Particulate Matter (rPM) In
Cigarette Smoke . In Wynder EL, Hotl'mann D . and Qotl GB (Editor.), Proc. dnd Wor{d Car{/. on &moidrg and fleairlt, lYew York
NY.197S, DHEW Pabl. No. (NIH) 76-1221, Vol.1:431-461 ; (loti GB (1977), Leaa Hazardou . CiYarettea. In Nieburg . HE (Bdiar),
Prrwenaton and DeucrJon of Cancer. Pon 1: Preyoudon. Vol.1 : 6dology, Marael Dekker. Inc ., New York NY : 791-804 .; God OB
(Bditor) (1977). Report lYo. 3. Toward Leti Harandout aamraa. 7Ue 7Mrd Set of F-speriieentd agontut . DHEW Pabl. No.
(NIH) 77-1280; (torl aB (1977), Las Hazardous Cigaraaee . to Nieburga HB (Bdiwr), P.rNertaton ad Deteettan ojCaneer, Pat cn
1 : Pirvennton. Vol.1 : Edology, M.rcet Dekker, Inc ., New York NY : 791-80W . tioti aB (1980), Lea Hazardous CiQarotte . : Tbeory N
1J
and Practice . In God OB and Bock FO (Editon), A S* aganaet Baubury Report 3 . Cold Spring Harbor Laboatory, Cold SPting N
Harbor NY : 261-279; (1980), A Summary ApprdW . In God aB and Boct FO (8diten), A Sqfe agantu! Banbury Report 3, Cold m
Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor NY : 353-359; Dorl f3B (8ditor) (1980), Report No . A Toward !su Ratordoua ~
agarettes . T1u Fourth Set ojEcpaimental agorraea . DHEW Yabi. KH) MaeeY (1980) . ~
00
w
3
, . .
TABLE 4 . CIGARETTE DESIGN TECHNOLOGIES : REDUCTION

OF SELECTED SMOKE COMPONENT LEVELS AND
BIOLOGICAL ACTIVTTY OF CIGARETTE SMOIW
Selective Biological
Reduction
Tumori-
. .T--f f
1V\ hnologj ~ gsw 4i4X Ciliatoxicitv
To6acc+o Proc+esslnp
reconstituted tobacco sheet t 50% 0 insig sig 2 50% sig

(paper processy
expanded tobacco' L 50 % M sig Z 50 % questionable questionable
cut insig° insig insig insig questionable insig
extraction with organic sig sig insig sig sig insig

solvents
Ciparette Paran~eters
cellulose acetate Sltration• sig insig Sig ~g msig

~~
Cbarcoal filtratloRd s1g ~ insig sig sig z 50 %
air dilution:
via paper porosity' sig = 50% sig insig sig
via filter-tip ventilation! sig n 30% sig insig sig
additives (nitrates) sig sig sig sig sig increase
Tobacco Substitutas Z 50% Z 50% insig sij z 50% sig
• lntroduced into elùott, detip In t6 . 8ltantipped W%riae and 7amm Amnsl (1953) .
b Ffnt used In marketed products by R .J . Reynolds Tobacco Caapanr ia 1968 .
• Introaucea In the siest WShlr succaaw sltertippea eisareae, nro wawron, In 1953 .
d litroduced In an LAM product, the Lork, In 1963 .
• Introduced Into R .1. Reynolds Tobacco Coaipany products In 1938.
~ IIntroduced In an American Tobsoeo Caapany product ia t96a .
s Addition of dusls or nn of hijh-aitaa tobacco Increases level of Maitro ..mines In tobacco smoke.
`dbbnvtaqoir:• CO - oasbm moaoactds ; BaP - beazo[o)pyreos ; sig - stjnt6cant reduction ; ioais - iasiSniSoant reduction ;
questioo.ble - tnduotiou .n1din .aV.eimsntd .rcos
~ H1odoted dsfm ior nioodns reeeat dfxt of tec6nolojies In use In ouanntly marketed U .S. cigarette products .
1 At kast one 1ob .ooo subidpitm swdW (CytraN) In the National Cancer lastimte's'9ea haaidow" oiSaeeae pooSram showed an
inereaae In per oipza . BaP delivery and In BoP .'1'PM eadoto.
0 United Stata Public Health Seevice (USPHS) (1979), SSwokWa ard tlsal& A Report of de SwSson (3enrral . D1iEW Pobl . No .
(PHS) 79-50066 . Ses Chapter 14, Tsbie 26 .
10 God aB (Editor) (1976), Repon 1Yo. 2. Toward Lcit floundow Qaanaa . 71u Serad Set qfFxPerGrunwl Qgantua . DHEW Publ.
No. (NIH) 76•1311 ; National Cancer Iastitws (1980), Rsport IYo . S. Toward Lesr Bazamdou r Qganau . Sw"MaT. Four W^
Palniina Bloauay. Uaina CondcnratsJian Fspai+nsnwf Qaarraei . DHEW hW . M[I (Septt<fber 1980) .
. .. , . . •.
While neither the Surgeon General nor Wynder and Hecht discussed in detail the effect of
the so-called American blend on the mainstream smoke components or properties listed in Table
4, data are available that indicate American blend mainstream cigarette smoke condensate shows
lower specific tumorigenicity than several of its component tobaccos, e .g ., flue-cured tobacco,
oriental tobacco. The polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon delivery, particularly the benzo[a]pyrene
delivery, and the deliveries of low molecular weight phenols are less in the mainstream smoke
from the American blend than in the mainstream smokes of flue-cured or oriental tobaccos" .
In its discussion of the "manipulation and control of nicotine delivery in marketed products",
the FDA limits the bulk of its discussion to events following about 1979" . Less than 15 % (18
of 128) of the citations precede 1980, t .e., the period from mid-1950s to 1980 when the effective
technologies were developed and introduced . The FDA's attitude about the events subsequent
to 1980 appears to be What cigarette design technology have you developed lately that will
contribute to a"less hazardous" cigarette?
Considerable data are available on the effect of several of these cigarette design technologies
on mainstream smoke composition and biological properties . Of particular interest are those data
which indicate the effect of a particular technology not only on the nicotine content of the
mainstream smoke but also on the nicotine: "tar'-' ratio. Technologies studied extensively at R .J.
Reynolds Tobacco Company include :
• reconstituted tobacco sheet whose composition is essentially 60-70% tobacco stems

plus 30-40% scrap tobacco laminae (see Table 3, Footnote d)
• expanded tobacco laminae (see Table 3, Footnote e)
• air dilution produced via filter-tip ventilation (see Table 3, Footnote, f) .
Because R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company developed the first meaningful process for the
expansion of tobacco laminae", it not only used expanded tobacco in the design of its own
cigarette products but also licensed the expansion process to other domestic and foreign cigarette
manufacturing companies who used expanded tobacco in the design of their cigarette products .
Between 1964 and the mid-1970s, considerable data were generated in-house at R.J. Reynolds
Tobacco Co . R&D on the following:
• the effect of tobacco expansion on tobacco composition

• the effect of inclusion of expanded tobacco in a cigarette blend on mainstream smoke
it Wynder EL and Hoffmann D(1967), Tobacco md Tobacco SmaAr S7wdiu tn F-spsr6nenwl Caulno ;wud . Academic Press, New
York NY .
® United S4tea Food and Dro= Adminlstratioa (FDA) (1995) Nlcodae In CiBareetea and Smokeku Tobacco Producta L a DeuB and
These Producu are Nioodne DeWery Devicea under t6e Fedeed Food, Dru=, and Caemeda Act . US FDA DHHSt 1-326 (Aajwt) :
See 232-288 . Chronoljy of Footnotes prioc to 1980 : 1964 - Footnote 404 ; 1970 - Footnotes 302; 1971 - Footnote 423 ; 1972 -
Footnote 503 ;1973 - Footnote 491 ;1975 - Footnotes 39Sa, 483a ;1976 - Foomoe" 430, 461;1977 - Footnotes 397, 398, 412 ;1978
- Footnotea 406, 457, 465 ; 1979 - Footmrote 477, 486, 48Sd
13 Fraddctwa JD ('1970), Process for lncrasinf the Fd* Capacity of Tobacco . U.s. Patst No. 3,543,451(AMguat 18) ; Moser OP
and StewaR oM (1970), Procew for Increada= db FWias Value of Tobacco . U. S. PaEe.t No . 3,S4Z,452 (AoYort 18) .
5
composition
• the effect of inclusion of expanded tobacco in a cigarette blend on the biological
properties of mainstream smoke
The data generated were summarized in a report, originally issued in 1972" . When additional
data, particularly biological data, were obtained, revisions became available in 1974 and 1977 .
Each report was provided as an accompaniment to presentations to management and R&D
personnel of the various tobacco companies interested in licensing the R .J. Reynolds Tobacco
Company expansion process . A copy of either the original report, or its first or second revision
was provided at the time of presentation . Cigarette manufacturing companies in the following
countries received copies : U.S.A., Canada, U.K., Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Japan, Korea,
China, Taiwan, and Australia . Although the data per se were not published in a scientific
journal, nearly two hundred copies of the reports were distributed worldwide . Many of the
potential licensees, using their own tobaccos and/or tobacco blends, investigated the effects of
tobacco expansion on mainstream smoke composition and properties . Except for minor
differences in the data, attributable to the minor differences between the tobaccos studied at
Reynolds vs those studied in the potential licensee's laboratory, the experimental data were
uniformly confirmed with regard to the reductions in levels of allegedly harmful components
(benzo[a]pyrene, acrolein, phenols, etc.) . The Reynolds findings on the effects of inclusion of
expanded tobacco on themainstream smoke nicotine delivery and the nicotine :"tar" ratio were
also confirmed . Most significantly, confirmation of the mainstream smoke composition and
biological findings (mouse skin-painting) was also obtained in the National Cancer Institute's
decade-long study of design technologies whose use led to "less hazardous" cigarettes" .
•
m Rodgman A(1972), 013-Sxpanded Tob .coo . (Deoembec), pp. 66 ; (1974). 013-8xpanded Tob.cco. lat Waion. (Febnury). pp.
77 ; (1977), 0-13 BxpaedeOTabaoco . 2nd Ravidou . (October), pp .177 . T6eee repoits are .uamoarks of data ont6e etfect of tobacco
expandon on smolce compod8on and pcopeede.. Tiw.e data .ren used io pre .eatadomi w mrn~gemeat and R&D peaonnel of vuiow
tobaceo compardea inaoeated In lioenaiog tM RJ . Reynolds Tobacco Company expan.bo process . Copies of t6e eepoeta were
peovided potential ttcen.eee at daa of praentadoo . Tobecco coaipinia Boaa tbe 6opo .viag couatdae were involved : U .S.A., Canada,
U.K., Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Japan, Koroa, China, Taiwan, and Australia .
1$ (7ori GB (Editor) (1976) . Repott No. Z. Towand Lat Rarardou pgonaa. 71rs Sarond set ofBrperbnenmt Qgarraer . DHEW Pobi.
No. (NIS) 76-1111; National Cancer In .tiwte (19E%, 8epoa /Yo. J. Towand lssa Rnundows Aganeaa. Swnnmary: Four sktn
Palnatng BJooarayr UaJng Cordenaatt finai Erpertnunta/ Qganaa . DIi3rW AW . (M (SepterDer 1980).
6
TABLE SA. EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARETTE
SMOKE COMPOSITION : A COMMERCIAL BLEND
(CIGARETTE SAMPLES FABRICelTFD 70 EQDIVALEM'
FIRblNES4j
Ratio of Control Tobacco B1end :Exeandad Tobacco Blend'
Anatyteb 100% :0% 90% :10% 75% :25% 50% :50% 0%:100%
partlculate nhase
. 4tar , 9, mg 28 .6 24 .4 23 .6 21 .1 20.8
2 .01 1 .60 1 .44 1 .26 1 .01

nicotine, mg
0 .0703 0 .0656 0.0610 0.0597 0 .0505
nicoane: "tar" ratio
carbon monoxide, mg 16.2 o~ b 15 .46-C'~% 13 .9 0Sl9 11 .5 O•s~ 9 .8 Q•'*1 t
t
1enzo[a]Pyreno, ng 16 .1 13 .0Q,ri'r 11 .1 tp, ,P 10.4 0• k '4 7 .1 e• %k*
formaldehy a, µg 53 48 1 q~~ 41 ~~51 39 t•~~ 36
965 955 aQ""f 925 3a • t~ 880 0' 11 790 3 7' ~ 4

acetaldehyde, µ8
' Cigareaea In each sample fabricated to eqdtAlent fir.mneat
b Per cixareae values
TABLE 5B . EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARETTE

SMOKE COMPOSITION : A COMMERCIAL BLEND
(CIGARETTE SAMPIES FABRIG!?ID ?10 EQUIVALEM'
PRF.SS'URE DROP)
Analvter Control Tobacco Blend ExpWW Tobacco Blend
particulafe phase
64tarp , , an 31 .0 23 .2
nicotine, mg 1 .88 1 .20
nicotine :"tar„ ratio 0 .0606 0 .0517
carbon monoxide, m8 14.0 12 .6
benzo[a]Pyrevo+ a8 20 .8 12 .4
Ys122CP~
formaldehyde, µ8 55 45
acetaldehyde+ µ8 1050 793
' Ciyareue . In each sample fabricated to eqd .aleot

b Per cisarette values
6
TABLE SA. EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARET'I'E
SMOKE COMPOSITION; A COMMERCIAL BLEND
(CIOARETIE SAMPLES FABRIGlTFD 7b EQUIVilIF.NP
Fm1VF.SS~
Ratio of Control Tobacco Blend :Expanded Tobacco Blend'
Analvte" 10oas :o% 90% :10% 75.% ;,2 5.% 5o%:sog~ 0% :10og~
paniculate nhase
6 .tar„ mg 28 .6 24 .4 23 .6 21 .1 20 .8
nicotine, mg 2 .01 1 .60 1 .44 1 .26 1 .01
nicotine : "tar" ratio 0 .0703 0 .0656 0.0610 0.0597 0 .0505
carbon monoxide, mg 16.2 15 .4 13 .9 11 .5 9 .8
benzoLa]Pyreno+ ng 16 .1 13 .0 11 .1 10.4 7 .1
i9w phase
formaldehyde, µg 53 48 41 39 36
acetaldehyde, µg 965 955 925 880 790
' C'iSareaea in each aampb fabricated to eqni .aieot tirmneds
b Per cigarette valuea
TABLE SB. EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARETTE

SMOKE COMPOSITION: A COMMERCIAL BLEND
(CIGARET4E SAMP1F.4 FABRIGlTlD 70 EQUIVAI.F.iVP
PRExSDRE DROP)
Control Tobacco Blead6 Exnanded Tobacco
Blendd
partlculate DhaSe
,. tar „ ing 31 .0 23.2
nicotine, mg 1 .88 1 .20
nicotine:' `tar•' ratio 0 .0606 0 .0517
carbon monoxide, mg 14 .0 12.6
benzoIa]pyrene• ng 20.8 12.4
MpQ,pl+'ase
formaldehyde, µg 55 45
acetaldehyde, µg 1050 793
' Per cigarette values
b CiYarauea In each wnnple fabricated to eaoi.akot prasaore drop
7
TABLE 6. EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARETTE
SMOKE COMPOSITION : FLUE-CURED AND BURLEY
TOBACCOS
Flue-cured Blend Burley
Ana(yte Control E38g0~ Control ExpAded
partic tg i+ase
. . ,• . mg 32 .9 18 .2
ta
27 .7 17.7
nicotine, mg 2 .75 1 .25 1 .92 1 .13
nicotine:"tar" ratio 0 .0836 0.0687 0.0693 0 .0630
carbon monoxide, mg 15 .6 7 .0
benzo[a]Pyrene . ng 28 .5 8 .7
ygpa phase
formaldehyde, µg 31 23
acetaldehyde, µg 970 575
' Fer cisacepe values
•-e burley blend

0 .090 N • nicotine
o--o flue-cured blend
T • t1tar"
x . .x coeeerclal blend
.080
N/T
Ratio
0 .070
0
•
X. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 .060 .. X
0 .050
I 1 I I I
0 10 25 50 100
ExpandQd Tobacco, X of Blend
Figure 7 . Nieotine/"Tar" Ratios for Expanded Tobacco Blends

TABLE 7. EFFECT OF TOBACCO EXPANSION ON CIGARETTE
SMOI{E COMFOSITION : STANDARD EXPERIl1Ii~'.NTAL
BLEND (SEB)'6
Analvta, Control SEB RJRT EzpAnded SEBd PM Ezoanded Blend°
narticulauphast
"tar", mg 27 .1 15 .6 18 .2
niootine, mg 1 .79 0 .78 0.74
niootine: "tar" ratio 0.0661 0 .0500 0.0407
betuoIalPyrene, ng 19 .2 11 .9 8 .9
MM phase
formaldehyde, µg 31 .9 20.7 21 .7
acetaldehyde, }ig 985 814 720
' Per cigaroue vatue.
6 Expansion agent - chloronuorooacbon
° Expansion agent - ammonia/caebon dioxide
10 (3ori dB (6ditor){1976), Report No. 2. TowardLas Hazandow Qaanaa . ?Ja Seoond Set oj6zperimenwl Clganaes. DHEW Pobl.
No. (NIH) 76-1111 .
9
• effect of RTS on MS nicotine
• effect of expansion on MS nicotine
• low-tar, medium nicotine ; the Gori cigarette

• tobacco substitutes
• tobacco extraction/reversal of opinion - nitrate addition/reversal of view
• carbon-filtered cigarettes
• 10
TABLE A . STATUS OF ASSERTIONS MADE ABODT CIGARETTE SMOKE, ITS
FORMATION, ITS COMPOSITION, AND ITS PROPERTIES
Asswlon Statr~s
• Nontobacco Sources qf PAHs'
§ PAHs in MS due to PAHs in lighting source flame (match, lighter) false
§ Major precursor of PAHs in cigarette MS is the cigarette paper false
§ PAHs in MS result from transfer of air pollution-derived PAHs on leaf surface false
•Precursors in Tobacco of PAHs !n Tobacco Smoke
§ No BaP is present in MS ; if it is present, its *or precursor is cellulosic false

§ Major precursor of PAHs in MS is one or more tobacco components true
§ The major precursors in tobacco of MS PAHs are the saturated aliphatic hydrocarbons false
§ Tbe major precursors in tobacco of MS PAHs are saturated hydrocarbons and false
phytosterols
§?be major precursors in tobacco of MS PAHs are terpenoids and phytosterols true
• Controversies over Presence or Absence of &wRc PAhfs in Tobacco Smolu
§ No BaP is present in MS false
§ No alkylated PAHs are present in MS false
§ No cyclopentanobenz[a]anthracenes are present in MS false
§ Dibenzo[a,l]pyreno is present in MS false [caveat']
•Mechanisms of,f~=genesis of PAHs !n Tobacco Smoke
§ MS PAHs formed primarily by a degradation-combination mechanism false

§ MS PAHs formed prttnarlty by a unimolecular aromatization mechanism false
• lavels of P,4M In M$an¢ Its Thnu~(ggntcitv
§ MS PAHs ara the only major tumor initiators causing mouse skin tumors false
§ MS PAHs are major cause of respiratory tract cancer in smokers false
§ MS contains a•`supercarcinogenie„ PAH false
§ Promoters in MS augment PAHs in their tumorigenicity false
§ Increasing BaP content of CSC increases its tumorigenicity false
11
TABLE A. (Continued) :
Assertlon &g{9
• 7he "lndicator" Concent
§ BaP is "indicator" of CSC tumorigenicity, levels of tumorigenic tetracyclic PAHs false
§ Phenol is "indicator" of promoting effect of CSC false
§ Catechol is a tumorigen false
§ Catechol is a promoter false
• Control of P.lX LeNels In MS
§ Removal of lipophilic precursors from tobacco reduces MS PAHs true [careat"]

§ Addition of nitrates to tobacco reduces MS PAHs true [caveat°]
§ Increasing number of cuts/inch reduces PAHs false
§ PAHs may be selectively removed from MS by PAH complexing agents in filter false
• Control of Levels Qf MS CeMMnents Partitioned between VP and PP
$ Selective filtration impossible false

§ Selective filtration possible with MS components partitioned between VP and PP true
•ggulvalence/Noneaulvalence of PvroEysis and the Smoking Proorss
§ Fate of an individual compound during pyrolysis is equivalent to its fate in tobacco false
during smoking process
§ PAH levels in a tobacco pyrolysate can be correlated with their levels in CSC false
• &morlpenlc Threshold LlmltsQf C ;ggrette Smoke Condenaate and Some of Its Comnonet~
§ No threshold limit exists for any tumorigenic compound false
§ No threshold limit exists for any tumorigenic mixture such as CSC false
• T~umor,jgenic Arrt Arenes In Tobacco Smoke
§ The tumorigenic ais-arenes dibenz(a,h]acridine, dibenz[a, f]acridine, and dibeazo- questionable

[c,g]carbazole are present in CSC
• MS Cotnnonents Alleped to Ciliastatic to Smokers' Resn[raLW Tract Cilia
§ In vltro water-soluble ciliastats in MS impair lung clearance in smokers' lungs false
§ In vitro water-soluble ciliastats in MS removed from smoke stream by carbon
12
TABLE A . (Continued) :
Assertion Status
• MS Comvonents Alkgedlv Resnonsible or Lung Cancer Inductlon in Smoker s

§ BaP and NNK in MS are responsible for respiratory tract cancer in smokers false
• Tobacco and Tobaeeo Smoke Comnonents Class{Red as Signilicant 74norlgen s
§ Tobacco and tobacco smoke contains 43 significant tumorigens false [caveat']
•Tobaccv Smoke Comnonents Anttcsarclnogenlc to Alleged Tobacsc+o Smoke Tumorlgens
§ MS contains components that are anticarcinogenic to PAHs and/or NNAs true
§ CSC is antimutagenic to (righly mutagenic "cooked food" mutagens true
§ Nicotine and cotinine are antimutagenic to NDMA true
' The bonafide benzo(a.lJpyrene was subsequently identified in tobacco smoke, but the PAH defined as benzo(a,Qpyrene
(dibenzoldif,PJehryaene) was nor benzo(a,lJpyrene (dibenzo(de, f,p)chryaene) but was dibenzola,elfluoranthene .
b Extraction from tobacco of lipophilic precursors of tobacco smoke PAHa produces an increaae in the deliveries of low molecular
phenols, alleged by some inveadgatora to be promoters of the tumorigenicity of certain PAHa .
° Addition of nitrate to tobacco or use of high-nitrate tobacco in the blend does deceroaae MS PAHa but Increases MS NNAa, many
of which are alleged to be tumorigenic to humacu .
a There is a host of reaaona why many of the 43 smoke components listed as significant "tumocigens" should not be included in
such a list .
Abbrevfatfona:
BaP betrao(a]pyrene NNA ~ N-nitmaamiaa

CSC cigarette smoke condensate PAH ~ polycyclie aromatic hydrocaibon
MS mainstream smoke PP ~ particulate phase
NDMA N-nitroiodimethylamine VP ~ vapor phase
13
.
: eptcr.~,er Z°, 2;56
S s: cni ~er :cal stotohooY piroos 26517-26520,

26W, 265148 2790LM27,
32C67-323.CO
RDR, 1956, ?Po . 9 Previotm reForta 3
RM40 1955, Na . 23
"s~ LY'SIS CiTCI?;_W
f`~ I Eflta
'o c .acrl. :A t--e expse-=en+„a :, SzveatiEution on tho ieolat :on a.cd/or i.deati-
ficatloa of eQvvral Da7,7eyol :c arc=tio ia ; drocarbona present in the cigarette
snoko oondensate froas CA)SL blead tobcoco .
:Ao-~t
':be five pcl7c; clic ar^^

.,.•,at .e
~a~er.e ar.;: 3,G•'v= ;; -mcc, ot*ea :.oo:tatod and idantifivd in Uo ciCa-
mcte awoka condensate irco C'.N:.L blond tobacco. TbsaO 2~qdrocarbcrs vcra idon-
tif ied Y7 otandard ehecical techniques and eoe`rersioa to one or rore known
derivatives .
The arcrmt .o ty''rccarboas wore charactoricod as tol2ovas

(1.67 =g . tY= 2^, ;C0 Vit'.::L c:gr,.rottes) by cclting toint, u1t .Mvt_o1et
crd ir.f~~r~3 atcc:-; s;,octza oS' t} :e ;;dr ca,r:ar.j a .^.fl :r_rc .^..ra_c ra (4 .03 rS . f: cm
~~.
.. w . . .~ .
ln
••~~9 . .~ ~' .. :. C ft~~,.rCL+i+ ..66~.~)
. ..
) ~ ... iXtLC'0 .Al . ...••~ ~43.w 1Lt...~Vs1 { V
.t~ ~ ..1 .. : .. . ~
.. .~ 4 ~.a..~
C*.. nn . ..~`CL
C}vC :'r t .c:'1 0',oC V rZ c f a 1 0 h ,"t'.Y'Q :..r bc : : ,* ..~. . .w 3 toltir.C point cf M.r o W .M. .I M CV :A-
„ I c"' .o acid C,. .Ed.C, M . .?CVISo t :clts•7:f; point ..IId i;l: rarCd atC'.cI';`YicA a pFot~" = of
ar.t~: mciar.o: a-9,1.0 ; r-.-rc,r,e , (1 .36 sgo ircD 1L, CCO CA.•EL ' ciCc : ottoa ) by r!xt ;r e
relting poiot ar.d ul :r aviolot atcorption aFeotr= of the Yydrocur :an, s3xtvro
celting point and in ."r~ speetr~.~ of tl :o p7rono-trinitroflucrencno cor. ; lem ;
lvoranth t,rg (1 .95 age t`rom •I49CC4 Ca :'L o:gGrettes) tq u2traviolot spect .-M
and r.vctureg relting point of the ~qdrocarbca, v.±zt•ae sAltirg Foir.t,of thfl
flvorantror.e•tr•_r.itrcfltmrenone Oowplcet ( l. ee~~
w9 . f.-= 33, c,•^.
;
.. :~ L ciZ-..rnttca ) Iv7 r.ix turo mc1t'-=.g FA :nt9 ultr aviclot and L.::^•.~rod n~..: a - r ~.~. VN
sfectra of th e L-, d m carbon and r'.xtur e = l4%,N46 :g poi.:t of LMa 3 ,4 -tcr.zrj:c:.0 -

îcrio ac :,d cccYlo m .
"..̀:e ©s po17c7*1ia It/c:rcc ; rxr-s9 3-r.ct'â3-
r;':'9 :0j `.~~.:~a i,lZ- :o : :cpcs7lono and anthan`.hm:e, ::.ve :eca
i4ent .::ed as o=sti!,•,:aata of Cs. :CL oigarette scoke eondonsato on tho ba nis
of ultraviolet abaor ;,tion epectrv.
2
T"T?IS 0F CCfi'f'FnT:Ss
11-^7 L° . . . . . . . . .. • . . . • • • • . • • • . • • • • •
L,i "J^ C? FZCIiÊS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LI~:' CP r'S~'n'~A~TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . •
+ ~ .~ .- .. . ...,.
Ii . . . . • 4, • • • . • • • • • • •
rwA~~.i?iJ'.:.:fLAL .• • . . . • , • • • 9 • • • . • • • • • • • • . .
S. i'iMy u"i,iiip 4ii : :•3Ct hode . • • • • • • • • • • • • •
4 , -a.-G ~~ir Uk
lIi`} . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • 15
L. . .oiYeIIti . . • . . . . . . . . • . • • . • . . • . . . . 15
z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A ~arattY . . . . 15
17
d 't1'reat,aamt of aML Cigarottos Prior to Sa.old,n
Irifluer.ce of Cisunce of Cigrotta on Manifol.d tYm

. . . .•
•
Suction Contor on tho Totr.a. 'h=bor of R:.° :s por Cigaratte• 17
IT . Ssolation of the 1iaxane-Solublo, .':eutml Tmctioa . . . . . . 19
III. Frsationation of tho "r .excne•.:olutlap Noutral .~:̀ action . . . . 210
a. Prauvl=7 Cbtacato~raphy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0410
Chrocatomaphy of the Auaae•F2uted Material (Mation 1)

of the Rmono•Coluble, Xoutral frsatSon '• • . . . • • • • 24
Cr.rorstaRraphy of tre PolMalio Aromtio 1t7drocarboa
N. ' Me Zso:aticn and IdEntilYaatioa of the Individual F ol^c7c'-=a

) r=ti 0 N.v"droCAr tOn8 . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . • • 119
Na ph i.Da iG ne
b. Antt...acom . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • ~7
•,. Vs. RC.A iC V;tA rAi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.ctIZATIDN CF A . :.AC''.»'iE AS AY?AFiAMMA•PIC"ruC

2. LF,ARACTF' ~
ACID CCMPS= . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . • • • 29
T4ryr rP ( Cont ,d) i
^? Aa:,:ro•.crM
. At A :^:w=a,
' ..
.._. ._ 3
6• A&'CRFTIOl7 ::PECTRA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3p4mPenspyrens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
1. CP.P.Mx.% TCCm PwY . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2• C!'.~2+ ~^~ah•1?IC .y CP 3t1,o .o''tLrMz• .' :E AS
PIC:UC ACID CCMPIE3t . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . • 33
Ar"^•`"'R .ICtt CF :-C'jRA • 33

d . • • . • • • • . • • • • • • • . . • . • . • . 33
l. Q~P.~t %.A 1'C VPAP{a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 33
.2, ~~r'C" . «AT .r.I ~'P ?L17C??A~~" .?''"~ Ac +•~t„IIro .s~,wat~ .•r~
.o • ~/. ..I V ~ W ./ . . • .W ./
~-Pi ;..~ . . . . . . . • . . ~ . . . 33
34
00 j-Yr ome 0 4 0 0 0 0 4, 0 0 . • 0 0 0 0 0 0 • . . 0 0 • 0 9 0 • 34
I. CF P'Sp..~. ;ZE AS PYR:.''P~.•TRI7I':.^•C..
34
• 2
• ~P:C"
~~ • a. • • • • • • • • • 35
I j 02. ::Elc :a a..~'.rGCBLè 35
»
b . Aat.~.anLhrs~s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
C. DIsC^vwICA• . . .•s•• .• . .•• 36
D• v^C!CC MIV!1S • . . • • • • • • 0090 • . 090 40
w ~ ..~~~.- . ..y . . .n~*c
« • i 0 0 • 0 0 0 • • 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 0, 0 • 0 0 • • 0 0 i .V
I. `Ytt r e Work • • • • • • • • •' . • • • . • • • . • • • 41

r
~ .. P•atant 0 0 a . • 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • . o • • 4.i
Mlcm r n 42
.. . 7l !' .ZL;Fj
•
P..~ ~ r~
.....
. bl "o
I Po],Tcyolio ~'ydrocarbona in Cigarette Emoks~ aad

Cicarstta Paper fcoke Coadea3ata :`~ ~ : . ~ : . . . .
16 •Vt. .d ' .%=bii C f % .,:a r= Ci rw-ot .4ro f or i nd iliLi mi
!'a::.fc,:.3 r'cea_ccs and ua :.ifold Rtr.a . . . . . . . , 19
III Preliminary
~ ~ ~ ~ Chrosat0 , ~,~~rup~ of the tIezaaoluble,
~. ~}
. .
•~Y4i"ii.~Y4i"ii"
~~Ai li'i0tion \F~7' . s • . . . . • . . . . . .
CF
Fiv~ure "~tQ,
1 :arsmtSo DSagraa of .mcking Apparatua . . . . . . .

• ar-fo l4 A . • a`r(. ....I~' :3ii , 1. .. . s -, • a •
LI!'? r`F' FI1'•.,'f?E="*Si
_F].cnrsho,,~ e ~
l Isclation of the Fozar.a.~ c2;:tIo , '!ott : a1 F: act1--,&

i: r= C :garette !7=o're 'Cor.der:,ata . . . . . . . 2:
Crscratograph7 of the F.exano•Sotnbls, Noutral

FY'Sct1oII . . . . . . • • . . • • • . . . • . . . . . 23
Chro~atorraphq of the F'cxane•Eluted Naterial

(Fraction 1) of the Aexar.e.:olublo, Feutral Praction 25 ~
~
y
• of `~'-o r rr .:;.t.io F.y drocarxn C:,ncentrata 2i m
0.
Ito isolstion r.ad Identification of F.aFhthal.en o . . 2s t.o
ko
OD
6 :fi.e Iso:ation and IdentL'' :catioa of Anthraceno . . .
4be IiolatioA and Identification of 3,1, .Benzpyrena .

5
~ . . . ....- .. ..~•~nr
..r.~.~.~...:1.~.. .5
Statistical anolysoo tcaod on rotroapoctivo (1n,35,51,60,66,67,71,72,71,,

%~,95,96,97,1C8,110,111,117,12E) nr.d pro;pcctSve (36,52) clir :cal otv3ioa r.avo
indicated that tobacco moke, and in particular oigr :rotto ea:o:ro, is a r.n.Scr
ccun 3tivo factor in the prcaeat bigh and iacreaeinC inci .'once of cs =or of tho
racpiratory eystsa 3n the humn . goceatly, Dol .l (34) has pro3cntod an oxoollont
cr.itical appr4iaal of tboae stctistical atudioo . P.e concludoe : . . . . . .tr:oro i3
the evidonce that oisr.rotte ecâking ia an i ..Yortant factor in tho p :roduct4cn of
. . Ì
rri'lw~ :C`~, ~~
:Cì ~,ta3t~'~:Bii~ Bii~ A .R.a~ ~~C~
~a.'~i . .'Vi~ .~
.~:Lwt\J w
:Lwt\J C~
C~1
w• .+n ..
., ~ 3rr4 , . t~
4
a •.. i1 `J•Z
2 A Y .L iarwr
•~, seo3 °oault 2'r :w expcsi . re to fiem or rore S.N.deFoadcnt i.~c:ust.^ral rrocococo .
:Y':et::cr t.`:o l.norease in oi g.-.rette co .wu-r rticn and the growth of the opec :fie
Sn di:strica can toget.':er account for tho roal' inarease in mort-clit7 and for tho
extant of the a:a2e preponcorance o .:nnot be soon with certainty . Fr.cvled,-e of
tho true extent of the cban p i n martality and of the i t:.^. d=octal = cc?:r.r+ ,z= s c'
.".. .ìaL :. r eI328 :a is g to 'ròr'"~t tho i^.rCpc.raticn o: a
4 ."~ ~or4. .r'
..ital;J, l .'Jtilf :ZC :eIIt
preciso Lslanco ehoot . There iQ, hovevor, no direct ovidencv to iw=,l3cato thc3o
othcr onviroa .rontal tootoro which a.Mo also knavn to havo inereased in prevslo :co
:-I tho laat tms or five docadest and it io a reasonable presuription eat the
changes which have taken place in tobacco ccx~t :ca (im a...~zr:t ard in Lot..cd)
are rc3,.ors :rle for t~:e raJcr ~.rt of '..h3 real inc :-v : se in ~:-•s11L; . 'a.^
ti~e action of oiEcr3tto enelce ls duo to ita 3,d-tera-prone contor .t or to scr, .o
other su ;stan..ê, and vt7 it shou].Y be d .Stcrcat froc that of mo :co fZ^cn pi ;ea
a.:d cid rs, is %m ..cs" n. . . . . .
atterpts to doter~...ine a particular cor..^,titsrr,t of cigarotte g: oIce possibI7

recronsib2o for the i nitiation of cancer of tho lti :ne have rorulted iz car.~i~cr-
aUo 3::vostiC-nt:cn ca tre cc=:calt:c.z cf c_CaretLo =cko ca :reroats . F.n:=l
data, e.ployi.^.g varic•,a i':rocticns of ciC:.retto =oko cor.deôato, have Lndicatecl
that tt:o r.a~cr ,~ :~t of t!:e c:.rc! .^.c~;cwc activity of ci~rstto s=o ::o ccrce~ats
roE_dc~s in t,t:o aeut:':1 iracticn (1~1) . :7~:o nstitral frccticn wcv.?c ^cr^m::7
c: a tz :.n the „u ' of tha Fol; c; olic arcL.:tic ;;,:r̀ocs.^ t cr.o ,, «,a V o: vri ct. :: ra
la .~t.13 %Vn~1 .~. : . .m c~r.~!..~r~t.. ..l
..lr~t .~~.r :.~ \ 5I / . ~.~ir.c ti.7 pa .gt b+C : : ..J J v ... .~r,
!
Otr ir``LL:3 .~ .n.VC3 •. .~ ~ . :'9 ~. ..i w •
879 .d.t.t+ .....
. .• .,:~ tto w.,aC«~G
!
: • 3 CS:C~/Cr •.. • i.
~ ..0 Z.La .7i:"
. :l
polycycl .:e aromtlc ~4rcroczrbcns Fret ent i .z tobacco ecoke con,:cnnato . Further-
more, aa :.-sl data ha :od cn Om tar ot+t,ainod L,7 satractir.g urecokod cigr.rotto
tobacco vith not2 :ano1 co=;arcd vith theso of the tar from smokod cigarettes
ou_r€ost that the aasor part of tho carcir.oEonio activity of aissretto s~olse is
produced dtaizg the actval amoldng rroccso (L^J .) .
:.: +::. U:c: ;:.:;: t t:o ca rci:o r enie offect o : iocacco tar
(c~t,:.r.ed ty dost :^,: ..ve di z t:~acn of tohacco) in : 3 b}its ~~ r a •.s rrcr'~3~
w4
a c_.. .. ...o6e .. .c ef.cP oo •„a di:e to t h e action of 1, .•'.-bcn: ant2'r co;.o, I, der .'lmt .vo3
. .w .~~ w'. r.1
on thooe aesq sFooioe . :pvotroacopic cx n .anstion of vsrious i`r-wct : cns of t.':•_s

t;,`xcco t:.r '~icatod ».e ^s~esaace of cc- ccctainir.g t:e 1,~~Lcr~::..-s±.~^,3:0,
., a :: :. .C : :z, _
W
I-A
_j
~
m
: . ss r~
6
7r.e sar,o year, ItoPto (F2, 84) identified nv .: rouo c=poncnts of toZ:.:cco
•
tar and acoko obtainad t7 the dcatru.otivo distillation .of tobacco . Diati?.Ia-
ticn of totccco at 100 to .1201 C. gave the following idcntiriable
corbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, cethaao2, a=onia, acetic aeidP - ac :etatcs,
F3ridinos, ` l .=thylp7rrolidino and ft-fa•al. •Dictil3atlon of anothar sampZo oP
to~ctcco at 350" C. for two hours Cavo tho Followinat oar .bon concadc:e, crston
dioxide, .a=oniuD csrbonato, acotic aoid, ncotatosp ouccir .io acid, lLz.3.. ~ic~ic ac :d,
.oario aald~ prenolio' aeida, Frjrrolo, ohloroph7ll derivativos, . p2:onanthrcno, IZ,
an•.hraccr,o, III, a*d "von.Y,rrc=o ." It ia o : L:tcr9st to n.oto that tre trr
rrrdi:cod b~ doatrut :vo di,otiila ~on of tobrcco at 3;C" C . ~s vory hig~ cr.r-
ai,nogenio . ae oon :parod with the ta,r : obtained at lf0 - 1200 C .
Lùring the period 1933 to 1941, F.ofto (£6, 89, 92, 93) docc='itEd tho tro-
sulta obtained by the opoctroaccpic study of tho tot+zcco tar ot,tainod by de-
atrti:ctive dictill.ation of tocccco at 3£0° C . A rrarkod oi-rilaritq was noted
botween the ultraviolet absorption trasima of thia tbbacoo tar and 3,4-Dcnw .-p7ror.a)
IV, in the range ?]r0 to 310 3r.}i.
In 1947,* IYoda (54) deeoribed the identit'..ostion of vnr'.oun cctponeMta ot

taLacco a^~..0 a . Ch . polyo9alia 2ydsoearbon of intorest vas identitied, nsrol,7,
azulana, 7.
17
Cooger (24) outL•ncd varic= z^.alytical t.eehni.qucs dovised in t :ia L^bo:M..-

tory to dotercir.e the qcsantity of tho polyoyelSo 2Crdrocarbon co :otituent3 of
cirr.rotto e~oko cnd tar . A raothod was alao dovicod for the idcnti .'Ycation of ~
t,) :o heterocyclio analogs ot'tho varior.z carcinogenic 2ydrocasbor.s, o .g., 1,2, ~
5,6-diter.:acrSdino, VZ. T!^.ia oonpouA ic the nitrogon analog of 1,2,5,6-ci- G
boa:anthMcene, VII, a very potont crrcinogen . Coop©r snEtgest.ed that cortain ,,
of the hotoroo7clia cos ::o=do raCht be constituan+.s of tobacco sr,bke and t . .r. m
Ma :7 of these hstar=,ic3io ccnrounds exhibit carcinoganic acti9il .,r or.h slighV ~
less than the analogous hqdrocarboa (53)•
•
1-O \S 4 ' i
m vin ia
:n i?~!., ;,efe :rl ::e (2, ?, G, 63) deccz-Stcd t~e identi . :cat:cn o£ 31i -
banzpyrvne in t2:o tar obtaiced fr= tmning oiCaretto p ::por . Tho tecr.r.:c;uea
e=ployed involvod reFeated cr.rosstoeraphy on al=ina and ol•saviolot abccrp-
tion spoct :rophotc¢etry.
S.brki.ng independont37 in Englands, Coopor and iin3sey (29), and, Coorer,

Cil:ert and Linrcoy (2?) reported tho identification of various . polmclic
aror.atio bycroearbens in the moke and tar l5r= tvrnlaE eiCarotte pzper . 11l:oce
authors er :ployed standard techaiqucs Cevalopad by Cooper and co-uor :rora (l, 21,
25, . I6, S8, 31, 11:) . °cpcatr:d .cr.rc=to,-r:~r:~y on a1=i."a, in co^,)t,..^;ction
~-::,c :ct spec•.r c ;._o t,o«.ctr ;, ::"2cr.tad t.d rPQ3C nco cf t.':o :0110'JS.b?
c : r:on$i p~er8::tr.rene, :3j anthraccr.e~ S :Tf 3,4~tcr.:,.~;rer.e . IYt ~ro:e, ~'===,
!'3ucr antrcne, !~C ; acer.aFbthylane, x ; 1,12..tenzopcryl.or.e, X i j and an•..h.ant~.Mene,
xII . An alSqlpyrenw t.aa also tentativol,y identified in the tar.
S
r mo
.
a
Cccrcr, :.indcoy ar.c WaLer !?1), Ccr.:-„ina, Cooper and Lir.dsc-; ( :.1) c--A
Cacp-er and h:.r,dscy . (30) ecploycd tho above aontionod techsiqws to idcntif7
ar.whm-ceno S :I, ( :1, 30, 31), pyrc:~e, ~iIII ( :1, 30v 31)o and 3,~C .•Len::,,-~:^cne,
I9 (30, 31 ;, in ciEcrstto cr.cko condonaate . 3be procoduros involved Sn t ::eeo
'_r.vc~ . . ;:..t!crs e ..~s "zed ct~ fo71cv33 Cc,:.:,:st :cn of the c :Cc :~ot'oa tz.:3r
ccnditiors si_~uhai^F the hLw:n wm-c :ar:g pattern ; collection of the s--oke -con-
dc ::ca .o at r^: ~ed t.erpe,-_t•r.-a ; r o=oval of aci :;io and b,:aic c=j.cnent3 0 : t : o
swoko condenoato Ly ct:cr.ical fractionation ; repeated cr.rozatoCr-_ph,7 of tho
recu :::.r.g r.eutral ta~.- on Als=ina to givo fractions containing the varioi:c p o3.;-
cyclic ar=tic tydrocarbons= identi.ric.ztion of thoeo aroa:otic }~ydrocarbcra ry
ultraviolot 3poctrophotoa.otry .
:n 1955, Ca ..«-pte11 and Cooper (19) identified 3,1,,•beazp~rer.o . 17, in the

aloe snuff nsed t^7 the Pantus of the ?tarsv~,.al. 'Yie aice ia p--opared
tq ::ectir.g aloe et= . Vonda srn:f':, vhich ciso cont3 ::s toba.coo, ia u: cd ty
the :.•.u .s . :a..-rboi1 and Cooper as.so Sdent ::.od 3,/,-ter.rpyrono in tho Vorda
snu ::. "!:e quar.tit3 fotmd was sis.il.zr to that identified in e .gr.retta s=Le
ccr: e~~~te '31) .
`: :.:k, ' :.:eh.,:rt and ".'a :er ( ;> ) dcs c:- : ted the idcnti : :cc ticn of v--r3
cu-3
co Yor.en ta of cirarette aacko ccndcnr.ato . Cno of th.o conpour.ds presn=t3 .y
Sdontd fiod Las a-2 :entr'_acontano w oviouwsly idcnti,f .ed t-,~ : c . .•~ w^
1
S.~i.~ •,~...VV :~•J r<r' . .. 1 J`-~ ~ . .~.0 .~; ~V 70d ~ : c ~iMA fni -7 V• V e s
r V . .V
.~ ~:•
;.:.coo usoc cy "oFar ;1 as .

"ccs :: 2+ ;S . ; ;9) aculd not datec•., 4 . e~ ecc :ca of 3 .-~r.r,,;: ono in t:s
oic*arette awoko corsdensato . ?i:o min differonco botwoon tl :o p~occduroa c_^ :1oycd
by Fosak and CcoFer vaa the diPfetronco in the puff rato . Coopor t-& gj . c-.r,lcfcd
a 2• .aecond putY overy 0610 sooondof vhereaa, : osxk gj glo ezzFlo7od a :.-aocor.d puff
evary 60 soconde . ibo cosavstion tompcrrs tnro3 vore e : ccntiLl:y the &ara in r.oth
invoatigations .
Wripht aad Wyndor (314) dese :~ibed the chemical fractionation of c3Lpr ette
crcke cc-x'cr.:,ate . ^:o F» oli_-+-.c .-7 :.mcticr.ation in this c:.re taa ecac^t'..a~:~
t.*:o sc: s cs t~.at of :.csak ;j -i-j . (59) aad Cco ;.er ~U g,l . ( 21t 25, .26, 23- , n7, 32 ) .
W-right and Wyr.dor astawtod that the qvantity of 3,l,~bonzpyrvae in tho szoLre
corrensa'e vaa one part par ail3ion try vei&t of the ahols condonaate .
SeolsapP (91)) idonti :iod capk.t.'•.alene, XIII, anthracone, III, a.nd 3,1.-
Mccr~ :-c~, I+, in :,ê moke ccr.ycnz ate fr or cir-,,rettos using osaontla1 .:Y L: o
oc=o Fzocodu.-es deccribed Frovicua3,y. Calculation, bcsod on ultraviolet atoo:~••
tion data,, iadicatod 50 Ng . of 3,4•benr-,.,jroae per 100 g. of whole tar obt :.ir.cd
froc, 2pC0 to 4000 cigarottcs . Ibo •puff rato and snok :.ng tocraratt-mos for tho
o:6-arotta9 were eaeantislly the aar.o as those reported Sn othor inveatiFutlons .
L: .r.dcey (68) $a~ar izcd the idcati .''icaticn of the Folyc; clio arcr~tsc
y--'rccarbors i.n cigr.rotte sc .ôke ccndena.ate prepds•ed in the laboratory of Ccopcr
Wr:;.t:t and lr'y:^.der ( 5, 215) do3critoa the idontification of an+,kxacezo, 10

p7•.-orso, VIII, Ferylene, XIV, f2ucruntroae, IX, chryflora, 7(Vv and 3,lvbcn :.l, . rc,
IV, in cif-arotte scaka cor.donoate . Zhsse authors also otserved L'•.:t the c:C .r::-
inC of c-'r.ontr:,accnt^.ne cr.d similr:r. alirh.:. tic 2Udrecr .Mbons obtai .^.o3 t,7 ea'. ~c' icn
of toracco C--vo, in audition to acotylcr.o and other gucs, r.a7 of •.l
.,:rbons idontifiod in the ciraretto seoke con.'.onr3atop e .C., :ecylirdo r-;^Y:r.~?,
aa YM~YCb r.e, c".ryEenc p 3,l.- bc n:,p7re ne a M flu.:r^Y.nt.hoae . I17 turn inC c:gsrctta
- ~J~weCO ..C:... . J A
n :a S• w * fPt.Ed~~li•~
q
Y•.. . J. .~wr .~,......w.'J ~. . .. ,* . . O ..v... .. ..=.r .@ Q Z., . t. .'.~ .L, ..
rct•„e ;a;.6r sr;::ro »en~orxata t•, :t vere =.-:le to i:cntS,* t: is co"cutid I n
=oke cordor.aata obtainod tq emoldng ciearot4.e p&per under oonditioas
tka bvma =o3d,ag Froceea .
r1I IrJ
9
i:yr..:or and '~r'.;;!:t (1 .:1) fract2oratcd cij-'"rotto =^ko cc^=4cr.rate L•.to (a)
a boso-f`reo, v2:ole oondonaato, (o) niootSr:o•f1roo baaia tar# (o) an acidic tar,
W a neut:-al ter, ( e) a r.otb7ler.o chlor:do ..ir.solublo tar, and (f) a vatcr .-
solubls tar .
tiYactions (a) aad (d) ; st~.ovEd o=i.no£onic activity conparab2o to that of

tho vholo condonaato . Anirsl r.nd epootrographia data based on the oiC=otte
tar obtainod trj extracting unsnokod oigarottoa vhen oorpared vith an :ral cata
of t!-e cor.Acnsti;•„a !`:= v-..ckcd,oi,-arottos i .wicstod that the ra4or pa .-t of the
Y:'O3e . .t : .^z e :.o~+2`9 :
:to~+2`9 to .. .ciSS iJ `: t.l
};~2'~' .
.i•JB~8' i•JB~8 OP `~'.e tOt60C0 .
La= (61) had also dotcrr S ::ed ttat t.1:o ;r1rolysis at 8CC<' C . of tr.o aLphatie
h; d :rocarLone ottaiaod trom tobacco yio].ded the polycyolic arcratio tr,drccar :bns,
n. 4 .~. . ~ w ~~ TZ, ..
... .~ ~. .~, .+ ~
.4.w cA .Q~ 'aT~ Yl . .. . .j3
. :~. .•iC . .Q~ ~: .~~ ~. .+ ~ ~ 'Z~Lr
:"7 . Mo tc: porrt .~-e of E^.C° C . is appr oxizately that oncoumtored

the norra 1 cSE---rotto axokiê. Froceca (33 ; 119) . 4hua, f: o= the data
flL-,r,pliod by hr.Grt and '4'qnc :er (5, 115) and Lzm (61), it Ss conceivable that the
alrbatic h;fdrecarbons pro : ont in tobacco are procuraers to the pol ;raqoL+o
ar cr..:.t.a `:-j--,.'r ccsrhons found in tko a«+oks cozyler•oate .
Lettre and Ja•rm (64) detocted antb :ncono, p7rerw, 1,2.-bon:antbraceno, 1,

~-rer.cYf:-cr.e cr.d 3,L,-bo^cryrer.e in tvo t:._w rrosor.t in srckod cieur tutt3 . Cae
. y ti ,. .. . ... . . _... . . . . w .w _ ./• .'.. ~.p • v . .r .rw v ... . w w a.3 Q a ~ : .ri
b j'~roc :Y'~on .7 .
I,ettr0, Jchr- ctd f!ausbuck (65) eat :.=ted the quantity of 3,ly-'.,on..~p7rcno :.:
t: e a: ke ccrr:c.^.eate S .or 1ok:'^ civ..-ottefl to bo 4G: J :g. :hiz is t : e hichest
c:l•:a otta :ncd to dato, represonti^g 26 .7 R . of 3,l.-bo=pyroro per 1L0 cir :.-
rottee (aee TàLle I) .
Lyer.a (6, ^0) r:;oated t: o Frccc-du.^cc ca•-r3ed out t-7 other :...^vostiC-,toro
~..~. `L.. the c~c : cY :,. f_ ,~_ w. . ~. . •_~ ..o •1
._-e r!`wws . ._. ., a ~~...
nw4
,s
.,
c J_ r....; w
a w ~, cti,.a .n
a u ,.o i
:~m 7 to ~" ..:,.:utos using 4-sQCc1~Ci• Me aLit ::or tiBsL`rCd that 9arjj, .^.~,' t: e
tor ;:o of oWok'.rC coi ::ciaod roro tia:% realSty than roCulr.r or "aver a,-o" scc :ei=4
r.oth-cds uoed L-y other vor1cer3 . :bo ranCa of concentrations of tho Fol;;cycLo
arcr.atSo hyCrocarbcr.s vas oasontial.]J the came as that reported b; earlier
vorkerc . I7ors idonti ::od •aeuleno and 1#' ,-bcn:.antt,xaccno in the cccko coadcn-
oato in addition to 3,4•teazp7reae .
Cazdcn ar.C (20) e3t :r :,.t,cd t~o S :ant .tf of 3,C• .co^cr ;,:rora in ci,-a-
. or r'. :o . co^'or^
«et•„o ..
.• . rr.• •e o : o r'
4 2 ./~ Fa • ~-
per w^~
w...•
. of v .r v ;or.
!^- V vi et rCi t td s • L M'crcnt b-ra nrs of Cam -- - Vs Lr
..
t: 41- :::7 w* o aam o vrl•.:e . ~.a ast:r~4„o of t: o qi :,:nt : t7 of t! .o 3s4 -to:.. ;~-J:cr.o .=
:.csc d oa t ::e u :traviolat aLvc: rtica -:xi= of the 3,l,.•bor .;-,7r-- r.e ar.d al: o cn
tto c :ol ;::c ai rrxor ;.s involvi .~Z., ccavorr :cn at the 3,1.-bon: ry: ozo to 6-icdo-
3,4-bcn .,^ .-,7rono follcs :od b7 ostiaatioa of this lattor a =pocn3 b7 spect-'°o p2:oto-
aetrio a,ethods .
Diol:ey and Touo~~ (32) dc : crited the ic:entiriaation of aa,,hracone, ptor :n-
t2-,roaej gfrenep fh :ornntl:ar.o# scornphthylor.o, cr.r,rnone and 3,4-cori: ~,~: cca Ln
ciearette a=ke coadonnato . :2ioce autt:ora used modific:.tioT.a of 7mos+n Froce-
dures vhoreby t.':o un3aturatcd alipb :-tio rsdrocarrcra vEre , sor=rr?,ed f-.ac t'r.o
arossatio hydroor.rbcna . Ly copplox forration between the insatura ~ ;3 ?:,, 3rcc.:rb:ra
and thiourea' iind by co=plex Forratioa 'botAen the arorntic 't ;~rocaicbcns ar:d 2p
4,7-'..rinitrofluoronone. Zheoo authors also empla3rod silica eel aaa the chrc-..,a .•
to?ro~}ac adaorbont inatead of al~~.c., the adac'rhont preforrod ty caot othor
iwvest : ..tors . woy a.lso sntst : :utod : e=ne for cyclohmmme as the ¢a ::
elutir:g ;aolvont .
Z7 cka7 and Tct:oq were the on'.,7 investieator9 to rercrt th3 aotral iao?a
:ation of epocifio polyc7olio ArorAtic h7drocarbons b7 cr=.c .ntioadchrei
other than ultrav .olet otsorption or :1Loreaconco spSct= ;:hct -=t:7 . :-e-e
ant?:ora e~ploy~ad mich rethodo aa ultr.:violot and infrared ataarption etWios,
a.elting and rAxtore melting point doter•...inatioa.grp and x-ray cr7stallopfa ;hic
studioa in their cr.aractori :ation work in which thoar oharacterizod naph '~^ co,
anthraooual ph.oaznthrene, pyrene and fluoranthene .
::b1.e I e=zs the avsilab3s data on the 3 .dentif:ca;:cn of the po :,q-

c7c.lio t7drooarbons in oigaratte saoke coadaaaate and the eati=tod quantities
vh9ra az:ah data vsrQ avai2abls .
9
„
u
PtÌ7V (CL?C ^?rrr~'" tw)s,f .r) TN .. .• ~ . .

--_ _
4bbacco Tar Cv3atit'! PC./I00

At b ~,... TV--%O..~. Folvevelio Mi??!~=rbon .~:1 . ,~
P~~?2t tee r Pef=„vlr,°
_
Roi'!o Cs3truative "l, 2-ben : anL':racors 83

~. ~ G . L . ,~M. YY
Aoffo destructive ar.tbrscors ~ 82, 84

diatl.ll,ate pl:enuntlzeao ~
(350° C.) ebewymm" .....
o C,•1y .
no:'.•a do3t~~.:otiqo t ,-,jTO1io" © P6, 89,
cistSlLato ~92, 93
Ikoda c:xko czul.ane © ~4 ~
i
coadsr.:~ta
3,4-bana,,-yreaa .r.~ 63
:.lvc ;~: <r .~n .~nw }3wK
.I1.. :~ bY
Cooper & "Ci tt: antr.rrcone 11,

_ '
Lir.dsey .,.t
mx ww
" acora;htbqlene ©
r.he= tl:!'On0 ©
c
f1L`0:' nt .~:eT.O
~ }r,-rone a evor~.,ll
..~..
1, L^•tea : opor~l8no ..~
...r
Ccopor, _ tte 8 CBr.Brht~^flOne E.32 27

Gilbort & M= Sie anthrnco-ze 4 .32
Lind$ay ghea:nthrene 26 .82
V.vrone 17.12
fluorantbene 16.8Z
3,G•tenz-.7rera 4 .C?
1,12-Leaaoperrlene 2 .2'`.
Ccoper , s» oke sw•Y~

P. . . ~W{w
i~ 33
Lindsoy & eor,der=t,o , , ono ....
r:a!Z :r 3,L-terWrqtror.a l.0
Ln
H
J
H
1 :^: l= :X ciczrotto FspOrs m
~ irz m 4:^0
. g . or 4S$a" LLO ;spa ctiL as o3 gLLTOL •a tocncco I s cut . (n
m
m
Ln
~
• ;; L~ 1 (coat'd )
Tobacco Tar Qnsr.tity fcg./3.00

Aathor TWO Polvc~elie Radrom rt~on _ -,,, Clr : r_ tt_ c_s_ . n M* .
Cosrlns, saoke anthracer)e ' 10 .2 21

Cooper & oondonsate Fyrone 9 .0
Li..~ a o-y
Cooper & smoke accaapht:Vlor.e ©

Lindaey •oondensata ant.tirao~
3,l,-bon: yyroae 08
1,12,-beasoperylea .
CesPbell ' m '' 3,4••boasqyreas sccs as tkAt preseat 19

& Cooper in a.-.ake condoasate
trcm equal veight of
cigazettea
Uright & smokn 3,S-bonzp7rsn@ 3-53

, -rxor ccrdersato
Seelkog eroke nathtr.alor.e

oondensat. ozitt~.rroone
3,L••tox .zpyrsne 1.<5-2.50
'.+right & swso anthracoafl 215
kyader oandensate P7rone
po=; lene
.°-.,:..^ ra rit'@2a ©
C}. ~ De:f3
3,t.,-tor.agyrea0
Lottre & "SJ=, a ntr.racor:o
Ja2m
Lettre,
Jahn &
IRM"
'=oke
c.or,deasat.e
;r~ror.o
1, 2.bon.,aztt-xaaene
1, : •benzpyrons
3,L-bonspyrece
3,lrtenzpyrer.@
) 26.7 65
?avabeck
lqo0«s BT.Co@ L' 2 uZoAo 6p ^~ v^

Cot7C~ eASate I, 2-ben:ant .1= cerA .6
3, :.-ten: r3: ec@ :. :
"> '"hose suw.ora eat :.:3 tod c,..., :.ntitj aa 1pa-rt ;c: :illlca ci v : o :o cc:.,; c:rsta.
Cae huadrod cicarettos giv@ 3 to 5 g . of vhols ooador.:ate.
4'ihis qt:aatlty roprevents tho total of t: e 5 hydrocarbons latod pc : 1^.0
oigar hutts .
13
• fw .~T^ ! ~ . .. . ..~tAl
Totacco Zhr c ur-ntit7 } C•11~~

~qlvr_e
i' .. ftt. .
Al': rer
.~.., . .. .~. ..=c7elle ,!':rg,.,,,,
c1_r,tga .
Cardon & awke 3*lr-benzwrans 2205 H~
Alvord ooadeasatA
Dickey & encka r.arht .~.ycro ~ 32

"'oz;ay o*..,am •.a _ :: t'rr-cwcc .....
.m"cnr..~t~roao .,.,.
Fyreno ©
flt:or••.nthor.o ©
3,4_beazFyroao
1,?2••?:en:.c;rot 7le~e ©
RodCran s=odo ace =;.hth;,lc3as tra ^19

oondaasat. raFhtt•.~alono5 16YOd7
ontl^.raccaos 7. Z-7. Pi 38.Lb
~!e
~ ..~..~~'~-eae
~.~.• .. . xCQ
ta`~
L"•^.'DS:EY v`
O
S'luorant-h one5 10.5-11 .2•Ti 13 .6~
^ ., . ., .. w . ... ..
(y .~
C.15-^ .<27
c -L ; ~J 1 ~} ~
3,G-~caz~ ; .~ . .i~ ~•f .~+•
1,~ .2_bonzoporylsne 0.147

anthanttrsno tr: ao6
3•c:ethylp-jrorre trsce
Ln
m
m
5 :3o1:t©d, :--leati ::x ar.d c ::•:ractcrSzod (seo ExrrriWor.t,al) . ~
6 % t'~.a t=sa cf_
7 Ca tt:o ba.9i3 of 314,00 C:."x' .. .L c :S-- .-ctt,e3 . Zn 3 scrica of ex ; cr:~ca•,a on
the protreat-oat of C.''r'L blend tobacco, 3500 C :1 :7L ciC.:r ottas wcr a
a=okod as controls and the polMol3o hyCrocsrtons eatiratcd afLo,r ccn-
cont;;ation by thiouroa aad tr'.r1trof'icurenoAe c=-eloz forr.ation and
orarvrostoarn~ (81) .
8 Ca tho br,eim of 1L,,11C0. . .CAbEL c{ ._rottes . In a sor_os of exxri .o^ts on
a4 a~ . n . • • .•- . ~i
n ^~ .. n . .
wt~ j
: . ri ~.. . . .. wa: . . r i . i. .r :: . .~ . ..~'.~. ..i~, ~ i'.1/ vr.a• . :.L H~~, : : £.` Mtv3 iif? ::t
..~
a=olCed ys cC-
.,l"ol .3 . -,,;rrQ^.o u~d
tiero with t: o corroarc n.Adir.s .' : rci~iors :`rrc~ t,ho 1C, .̀C0
c±prette run .
9 ^-- the be ef,s of 13 9 OC0 'C ~ ;
4%- i, c ±-?tte3 , in L2:
Z5<.0 CA : rL c_p..~ttas were s, .Mcked . ':'t:©
ir.C aFrrox :=te1,7 = pCe of 3,C•ben:,-g-rcr.e, ua.s c=bi:cd vith t:a 3,4-
ben: pqrar.e fraot3on lron the 1C, 500 C : YEL al.Za.wette r~.m .
0
f
. 4
:7o reaoarcb doacritcd in this report rorreseat3 a ccncertod ofrort to

• 1
2eterr.ino Wr.othcr or not tho poi;-c~,~c1So arcratic hyc:rocarhora rr o proccnt
in cip;r,.rotte aaoko oomdcncato. Cr.o of tho sa3cr obJoctions oftored to Fr :-
vioua imroatigations io .th,;.t t2•.o idozti:' :c:ticn of rpocitio ccnrour.@o colol7
on the hssio of ultraviolet ah+sorption etisdioo Is not 'dgri'riitive : `Sincv tho
preaont reaearch descrihos the actual isolotion . idcntification and c:~.,araoter• .
i:ation of soverai pol7cyclia ar=atic 2ydrocerbonep inoluciing the hi~+.2y
cc.-ci:o,-eaic 3,4-Àrzryreaej t:e rayor critic : .:ra of yaat rosca.Mch r.ro ncl
CU2L' : iod .
12:o z81or stePa er,.plojed in thia h.boratoz7 in the Ssol.z t:on of tho
Yol„7oyclio arcratio }Lydrocsrr.ons 1`rom C.%•iL cigarette =aoo cc:don^rato wrore
ac followas Col2ection of tho cnoko co :der.aato un'Jer aroking crr.3itior.3
.. h,. ra .: s--css.Z lh ..`_-ita ; c: e -. :c:.l 1:rct :cn:.tica of tho vhole ccndc r.-
••. ' -g
. ... . . .,s,:
s3teo to give a hoxar,e-soluble , neutml t`ractioaf ropeatod cr.ror.atogm#.7 of
the hoxane-eoluble, noutral fracticn !,n ordor to conccntrate '+.':e po17c;,•coio
arosstSc h7drocarbons f chrcratoC=pb7 of this arc=tio lqdrowrbon concent :ate
to soparate the ir.dividual 27drocsrtror.sj charactors.«ation of t': e in3ivid=l
polyc7olio aromatic tqdrocarconsf estiratioa of tbe =or=t of tho ir.dividul .:'
rydrocartaas in tr.e amoke corwona.zta on the w:sis of ul:.:.vic.:at ahsor-eti :a
d.zta.
.'a acmo iaa :,:~r.caas t.:iaurea,* picri : ac:,a ax

formation was utSliaod in the isolation and ideatificatioa of apecific aro¢a
t7droQarbons . ~
Ln
m
m
CO
15
. •... .
. .
. . T
1• ~`n`~r+a'+q arj Y^t~^"ao

~1~' ' ~r.r~~..
3•..C.:.f :r:- tIPIL

: trr.dzu%d C'r'EL ciprottcsp diroct iroa tba production li:o, wore
er.ployod in this stt:d,y.
..~ ~ ..i .~,, . .w
%•ll solvCrt3 '.iOPe di.'.ti11Cd .w.L : :t ;'O_-rrcr Ic -Csc'.I : © prior to tlr.C Ln

or:cr to =::.-IWizo t : 3 4iQ!cr t of n or.-vo :~:tao r.-tv'rial cc ntJincd tte2`C ; .^.•
^:o sciven' : c :.=.loyed wcr oI:exrxe, e;c1oh=nej. bonronol, e'cr,, ehloro :cr:
ar.d r e t~er.cl . "1!rsvi olot absorrtion at•:aies irdicated the sb; on..^c3 of
poi7c, ci :c s :c-. ..^ t : ch7 :~roca .wbor.s f-& :~• t-te o'istil1,¢d solven+,s .
( ;'otebook pages : 2?1?01t2?902)
Tt:o c p-pa rst un em plo,?ed for tre eol,lect c::

n of t IM C•+ :%:L ci4a-
m tte c = ck o Ma:er.3a•.,a :•as ecoc n t i.c~~ •e c..., ....o
. as •t •w ~ d .,L ~
v r...
..w `
. .•. . : od t;
W;µder, Craha.: ar.d Crcr.S~,rer (113, =0) . ; r.ascr di ::cr_rces were that
A +t 4 • • .
.
, ,- ~- r
1. ` :oked 60 cie-arettoe Lt a tir.o vhOroas in tho r.osorrt
st•.xd:r 30 c:j!` ret-tea Voa s=eked o :,.,.-ultar.oousl,^, and
2. :'nc?rcd t2:cir ci*s•••~+.tpe in a ve :-tica res :ticn :..crorc

in tlzis atud•j t?:o cib :..wet•„os vere swoxed i n a : cricc ntal
poaition.
"~ir ty V,121. ciC:.rottc3 werfl rlacod in a'mLtc,; of 3 s?- c-.ino c: r-;,,

. . . n .~ .~w }~ Ii vn '"S . ..~aiV~.v =. .w.w~
Vr. I 1CV~ . . .~.~/ ` Y• .Y.Q -lwr
\rrV• v . .Y~ . . vr
i
~'i 9 V O i. .C r.o
c!+-,_r ct.tcs as coon 3s a45- r :• to :;-~.... :e.ogt_h had 'ccon ccr.a4:..oc . :::o
s.. w^, A, ; :o.-V J!aced in p3 :t:on cn an Claca car.:eL:::::-:14 ::c
rocoSver on tho smkinQ i:ait. 'gais rccoivor s as conr.setr.d to a serieo c£
t•.ro 2_liter flacksi .E1, y„1
t connecting tut .on• "L•oc© fl .lnko s:ero i:d crzed
in Cry Ice contzinod in a etainloso stool tar.iss Co ir.wulatcd s:i W ccr'-,
sroetir.g, D . "Y:o rcecivirs £l,as ::s were ccr.rcctac : to the vz.c= FLr' p, `,
.. ..• ..w .+ .w .'~
/r • :. H
~••
~. glass tu :c ccntaiwc ; =,,^z~„x e~s .co3, G .
"':e vacu= vas orcated ty a s: a11, electricsll, dr :ccn r..w p, K(1.3

cu . : t . d _s^3.: ce-3 ::t of ::•eo air s cr rr n::t3 at a vnm= of C7 in . c .' w a r-
v
t}:-Oe r . r• :.. =o tcr , N, K-'s c.ut,. :tica1,].7 oponcd S'cr a 2-coccad irt :.•^mA1.
al:ov+.ng the vwc•, :,"n t:-= t; o ai .- ~ to be applied to tba co: ~
•. :i+iri .-1 ~ir 0:7 to +i. : O ., .:...ci,~:.Me ~•
... ... .. .3 ~+f~~^' .~a •1 . .~ w. . .v• .: .• .~
L.
0 0 0
~~ ®
\
l $
C r
I /, 11 "-\ /, il,\ P
`NI/ II a\/ II .\II:'. F
H I \ I I" "~\" Ar
FIG • 1 SCHmiA`PI C DIAGRAM OF SLt UKING APPARATlT :3
0T0S OTLTS
17
".'bo =ksr.g tS : o rcr ciC-Arotte avorarad 9 to 11 uinutes or fr= 28

to 33 put`:3 per ciCarotte at a rate of t,r co 12-soccnd puffs por ;.j .~,:to .
:Y~.e cisrsottes vc .-o szokod so thut Ar--czSra ;el7 45 to 50 = . of the
length was cons=od leaving a butt of 20 to 25 =.
One da7's onoldng uoumlly cowi3tcd of 1100 to 1,L00 C% :-SL ciVrottca .

: .e vholo condoncate was rirsod 15roM the variovs piocos of Clas3~ .aro into
the first receiving f2aok (uhic.3 goacra13,7 contained the na j cr rorticn of
L3 i .,. .C l 6111
:3LM
•
. .. nC 1.. .
.. w .. ! •
4 ~+ n
. ti to C "
~~{~i = ..~ . C
P
rVV~A•MVJ woro Mu • ~~i .^. i V ..Y • V• c :1'

. .1,@+y{~ . y.~~/v.1l of
the tar r f M•Y VYe sYrV~ •
cp;.urat•, :s * n e -.ot. :: o1.±o nolu•,;Son of tho C+ .MIL ciga.Motte =cko conden..

oato vas t ::on nub4 *ect..~d to a ckowial fractionation to be doscribed Sn a
ez:beec,uoat port of this report .
:.• s6C jz l~iz

o ,;
Fcur hLmdred C .'. : rI. cigarottos vere stored at 25° C . in a stsialo3s

steel 6-ire soch tnsbet in a dcsiccatcr containing a solution of 750 g . of
95 pcrcont elgoorol and 250 g . of vater . This solution r ..,iinta:..ôd the
woist•.:.-ro ccntoct cf t .a c3ccrottos at 1^ .,:.4 perccnt . :I,.e contact t!=
in t-he desicc .ztcr was at least 6 hotzs pr'•or to s=oking .
..e" _ Cr .~t Ca .,«CO C ~t+3 O' ~'.:.^!1Cw_a""'" ''u~. . C .,
~• .. .~.
_Ce~tAr_o~ thgyiotal "~~ sP ?y,iP~s~r~C,~&arQtto T ::otobook
Pa~;os 27~02-2?903)
:r-o arcld .DZ " .^.: :old ( ::~aa 1) was arrar.ged as shc~a in i'i2 .
ao t.%ore cculd cOaceivab.Ty te a di:'feroncfl in the total n=tor of

pUr!'s per cigarot•.o t;a:ecn c!wa :rott.â 1 a^~,~. 5, 6 a.w:d 10 cn :1
1:, 16 c-A 20 on 'rm Bs 21 ard . : 5, 26 c nd 30 on 'r- Ct di :o to t::c
1~ ..Jnw .. *4I~ pAtIi. .= q«1~~.' W .S~ w . ...S
. .••J ..y.y ..~.. y.~~V.~:~•~~ Vr M .V JLb V•VM C1 . .Ib~r• .t7,r
W,~
flr ~
.rD .. ~.eV~
. J~ W :~
. .~+Wwre~ tA i .. .w .Iw .L wL~~ tr • .~rt•~rw11VI~ n~
C2
+$r . . :f7 A~r(3 .~.r i~
.~~• . .~ ~ L .. iN ,~ P • Cw ei.Cil ~ V~.LO
• W i}+e ;r7i ..~ibr$
.. • w
on Arms A, B ari3 C . :5b1.e 11 srovs the resul•,,o ottai^.od . T"..o avoroce

nLWbor of p,v.*'fa per cigarot'.o tcr tr.o ovar•aU eystcn uus 30 .3 puff3 por
oigarstte .
P.o ossontial diff0renco vas found between the puff rates at di .°:orent
unifo :,d positior.a .
11 12 13 14 15
rm
Arm A Arm C
To Suction Centre
FIa . 2 3tANIFOLD ABRANGFLiSDiT
ZTOS OTLtS
19
^ TT
, .?riy"•'R C? Ir i .:.1',!ti'
:..~ .:~~. ~. .. ... .~~ .~ ..~.~ ~.~ ,. . .~.
A M1a A nu , _,a
A 1) C
Fuffa por PuFfs per Fuffa par
òy C, i,rm, ,~„~ .tt3 ~wA. l;;o& Ci rc t .,~~
° &. ras i~ro
w .~ .. • w ^
wl .
/1 ~fl
1 ~'~ ) tr :
.l ~~ .i
.~.r
~
~ 4
~4
3~3 i II∎`.:
∎`.: 3 '.:1 . GiV
2 2?.-.~"9-3Y 29 .3 12 32r-.29-30 30.0 22 31--29-31 30 .3
3 31-31-32 31.3 13 29-2 .• .30 29 .3 23 29-<"9 -29 29 .0

4 32=3i-::9 30 .7 24 3y-30-30 30.3 24 3 "Low 3c-30 :c .3
5 31 -3 229 30 .3 15 32-a9-3o 30.3 25 30-31-29 30 .0
6 2 9 .30-31 30.0 16 31.•32-31 31 .3 26 31-3C-31 30 .7
7 33-32-31 32 .0 17 29-~''9-31 29 .7 27 32-32-<"9 31•0
.. .. . .~ ., .. ....
Ce 3 ~ -3., . .,1 . .,
.3 1 .0 ls 3~ -3 ~
1 .~ .~
31 ,~. 0-,
2-0 n
?-C .3
9 31 -22-31 30 .0 19 33r-30-31 30.7 29 29-31-31 30 .3
10 29-•~"9••29 ~`-'r 20 32-29-31 , 20.7 30 30-31-30
~ Av+erago 30 .3 Avoraga 30 .4 Avcraee .30.2
Over•a11 Av©ragg 30.3 puf:3/cigazbtte .
ZI. Tao1 ;.ttom of thl ;;Lgutzal ~:c ;_,m (`.otobocY

PaCes 27905, 2F.436)
Tho zct.hanolio solution of the vbolo condenoata obtai .Mod by s: olking 1'_Co
to 1LÔ CP.2!F.L ci,r.:rottes (end aon ;„ainir.r 45 to 55 g, of whole con:cns:to) w:.3
nc•a, :' :cd v :th A4,n -3 . of 0 .2 N h ;drochlo::c acid . :^ho re~,:lt :: ;~cidic
t:on •aa.o estrr, .c~„od vit.h a total of 1500 r1L diotillEd he=e in s :x <5C-C-.1 .
;.crtlozs .
. The '.-. Q .1r .^. e Gx t, .. .îr+Mi Yor e C c .•~.vrn ii(i .. .1 d eX w M c+vC d with a v C rJ .rt r .i c va. 2! .+ N i: .3
nP /.'/r1 ~ .O n .. tt s.'.d1 .w+ 5 . ..'~ . .wJa ..1

.. . .. .~• . . . . . . ., . ..~ .. .~ •y . . . . . .~ . . .r.w'~
.~ ~ . ^r'. ... ..
w1 ~ . . -r .
.~~ 1•~C`
~~
rc: y_ors . :he :ot~~al vrs ccded to !»' :o d,'.1;:?.e al~r:l: to : ec~:ô t?:c :ar rtics
of o :r.ulsione and sntsoqr.ent loso of polyc ; clia aror.atic Y7d .-ocar ho na . iho
I:cxzao ext .-act vns then sxtz•actod •.+IW% 1 ;0 =lL of an aqceou sol•.:wtcn of
..~ .L. .w \ : . • .~7. • !A 7=1~~ n e~ wF ..A .... l . ...
Rt7 w .. r! ~ .. .r . .Or ia V• I "1 r . . ~ ~ .C4 r~•W .g ...•~/ b . v .~. .~. . .~.
iJ .".G CGLCO :.w"'s'•n?C '~'. 9 .^.L`12 aZi .~'.v`r 1i. Tro 9170 'C:.a L'.CY.^. .w.^•• .^.CS
20
'• tol=3 of 10,5~,'YJ C'~TL ciC~arottes vcro s'r :osod yiolding a total of 430 u .
of vholo condea=te (kaccd on tho detar .:.Sa;.tioa of tbo voi;k.t of condor.oa'„o in
an aliquot) . Chorical t`ractionatioa of this vhole oondonaato aa rccc : acd nbcvo
gave 77.594 g, of the hr.=r.c-colublap uont.zl :tactica (0 .7:2 g, pcr 100
rottos) . Tr.o c.6.= :cal fftatioaatioa 3s au=arizod in Flovahoet I .
In an initial oxploratory run, a total of 25C0 C.' : :L ci Pb--r* ttrc 'jrro ~ c::cd
ti ~~?? 2 t .a..1! C f 11.0 E . ~ f -.1 Ola C^ :.Ae ".
~"~ ; :'7C3°_uCG' •.3 .r .. . .w
; eldcd +6 .0 g . ( 0 . c4 0 g. per 3•.^>0 cisarettea', of t:.e hcx: r.o-ao1u::a, r.e•,:•sal

!ractioa.
In a cuL~soc;z:er.t caoking rur : in vr3ch the protreat=c::t of C,c'EL ciga .rotton

z-aa boirx investicated (F31), 35C0 C'IY?L citarottes yio] .Zed 23 .365 g . (0 .E63 g .
per 3...O c :r~~.~ottcs) of tco ~cx ;.::o-solu :.le, r.outral f:action . At v:~or.a pointa
in the e• ;r-,.eri.,.ental vork to te doscrited .. certa :n fractions fron each of t .cse
t.~soe ruaa Were eitNer comb ' ined or iavvo3tigatod for spocifio polycpclie r .ro- ..atie
Wrccartons . Fovever, the bulk of the work •.4 be doccribcd in thio report
concorr.s the hezane-aolub3o, neutral t~mction from the I0*5G0 C12GIL cigaretto
r%M .
a•.. Z'21jr-,4,n= (notebook Fagoa 3t07C;3=C73t 2E437)
Tho p.aterial comprisina tho"hox ::no-solublet no•stral fraction fr=

•
owo dm7lo scokirle ( Table III) was chr-omtogr pl :od on al=i.-a ( a 1Lwir.ti~
Cxido Kerck) L: i.-.g a colurn, 45 nn. in diazeter . :be hci£ht of the
co1== a : ter t=,^.i:.g vaa 250 = . V.e he^.rar.o-solu'r,le, neutral -Craction
vaa di3solved in 60 r.l. of ho=..â, placed on tbo eoluz-a and eluted with
600 =l . of hewro, IOCO nl . of 15 porcoat bonzene in hox,r.ne, lOCO r.l. of
tc.=ero axd r..o of :'bo velchto of t..a 4 S~cVrv .s rse
ia 7S bl o . .a .
Fraetiofl 1( oluted by hoxars ) con ..istcd of aaturatod, in :.âtu : ated

and arcr.atio hydrocartons ; fraction 2(eluted by 15 porcont toncene-roxaae)
cor.s istod of ur.saturated and arocztic h;,Tdrocsrbons ; 2`: action 3 (eluted Ly
benrEno) ccoraiated of the hi,-% rolccuiar voight carborql cozPoLndsl and
fraction 4(oluted tV tnet:.aaol) vso the residue a3 shown in Florasheet 2 .
:`raction 1 was slightly fluerescontf whereas fraction 2 was higb .'~y rluo-
rescont in uitriviolot ligr,t .
r raction 2from Rti:r.s 1, 2 and 4 vero ccnbL~.od ; fraction 1 from R=

3t 6 ar.d 7 were ocuhinod ; and fraction 1 from P.urs 4t 8 and 9 were cc :.,-
bi nod for aubsocusat c~romato~ra ., .
I7raotion 2 i .-om eaah of the ni ne r•.aa vao corhazed . Ln

~
~
~
m
Ln
m
•
~
~
r;n+`'s~ :•:T
;°r'LS'pI^!?
~rr. : ..
C» 'f '
1215 C~* ="L CTC0

-
?r'T'"='S
r .~.. .. .~
k'FL LF C^':'J''!'+r 7F
f*r= gl :.ac .-are with zothanol.

I 2 . hdd 650 r,1 . of C.2 :7 L-.,drechlot'lo acic: .
3. Extract with 6 x 250 rlL of ho=r.e
Aqi:ooua ¢eth.:aol lam F+cxa: ti 1,ayer

.~.
l. 'c5ttrsct with a ooZLt3oa

conai3tir.g of 6C0 cl. of
C.2 :1 eod' :: tVc:-a:-.+Co
cr.d 75 .^.1 . of mt.'-.:.-:cl .
2. :xt,-,,.ct with a sol::'! =
of rot~.a^.ol :•aatcr, 1s 1J
,.,cC ,:1 . .
~q~ot:o ret:a.-:ol layer l.a7er
ACZDIC T'R , .".•••.; , L F?'.Ml""T
6 .94o c.
Ln
m
~
cn
Tf FiI iy III
CfiRfTA'i'')f:nfFi:Y rF
T?"rF 15% E'enzone•-

g . 100 Aexane- hexano- 1'.enzene- Z'sthanol- Total
Qien- ellite'_1 03111.04 el ut.e elut nd 01 tate4
Ftun CiEaretto
l1o . flO . ~+ . re ttcs ~_ ~ --~- -- -% _ ---L -- ~ E_.
6.940 0.571 ' 2.2105 31..8 0.358 5.2 0.750 10.8 2 .888 :t.7 6.241 E8.5
1 1215
2 1:70 9.087 0.716 2.283 25 .1 0.302 3.3 0 .542 6.0 3 .805 41 .9 6.932 76.3
3 1150 8.61.0 0.751 2.157 R4 .9 0.451 5.2 0.514 6.0 4 .653 53 .8 7.775 89.9
d, 1320 10.719 0.812 1 .362 12 .7 0.454 4 .2 0.134 1 .3 1.957' 18 .2 3.90? 36 .4
12C0 0 .463 1 .313 23 .6 0 .326 7.0 0.100 1.8 2.915 57.6 4 .7]4 P5.0
5 5 .5562
6 1200 8.807 0.734 1.4'37 20.9 0.468 5.3 0.290 3.3 3.599 40.8 6.194 70.3
7 1250 9.447 0.756 1.947 20.6 0.453 1..8 0 .527 5.6 3 .990 42.2 6.917 73.2
8 1200 11.235 0.936 2.947 36 .1 o.646 5 .8 0 .1322 7 .3 5.9s1 9.3 10.396 92 .5
7.463 1 .080 1.667 2:.2 0.343 4 .6 0 .357 4.8 4 .061 51. .6 6.428 e6.2
05
10500 77.f!94 0.742 17 .71i3 22 .7 3 .P61 5.0 !, .(?36 5.2 33 . P49 43 .6 *59 .404 76.3
*j'ortion loct on uatrr unpirator .
910S OZLTS
23
~ ..' •.r
. :.~ .y I L `' = ~ C T T ^ ~ ~
grYe~~ . 7i~;iT7R' L FPlC"'ICa

= ;vnL tTc~LF.
6.940 g.
;
CLr^~,...Mtoira~ on alz~i .~xs (45 s~ . x 250 ~. )
~`------- -
~,~ ~eazonc~•• conzene r.otr.ar,ol
~~ao 100o a1. ~ zaoo r.i.
2000 r1l .
y u
ro,
FRO- 2
,
: n .35`?g . 2 .8F3 g .
~ G» CL'1~tiQ ~ chxlz kotoixs,

~ ~; ~ car Vos, ' etc .
1 eato rs
I I I
~~ C;abS: o vit5 s-» h=ct:or.a 2`r= eiG-.t additioaal cr.ro=tosra=}

I , I I
%.V
77 . 1 . . . .c :.J~ 04
~
i .
:,.. . .w g• 3 . 2 61 g . 4 .C3.5 6- . 33 . "
-"-1. 9 g o
~ total tota3 tot al total
i
w
To FLCdSFIZ:,T 3 To FLGSr=T 4
I`~ . .. ..+ .1 . .~w b <<+
P[!n v.w .. i~.
`
r•'j~rfn~w'w•~
I, .~ ct_cw. I _ cY ,, .-~_o
D"'"-.I'-:a (Notabc>ok Fagoo 32G7:o6s, =4:3)
: ..cticn l ;17.117 g. ) fcon tho prcocdi.-ig ch.=toC= vaa chrc .:: tc-
Era,pbed on ah:rins (Alucintm C~cids ::orck) uning a oolucn 45 == . ian d3ssitar,
250 t3a . in 2en'gth. Thrco scri.rato c..a ztograas varo r= wL^g 5 .63a g.,
5. :.E2 ;. e-- : 5.920 g . of this ='.3rSs?.
Tvc'_va .A.=wc:.3 v:rc takon in s.ll (1:0 e2utoci uit~ l vith 90

poroc=t bo=oaosowcne p e : d 1 ti,r ;_th u3 •^ ^cl) . Those ft-ac r :.cns, in t,.-.n,
uora ccbir,cd on t: a Yzz :o of im-'r^.,rod at:ro:p+„icn spcct.Ma to zivo 4 .^
olanaas o° c=;)curds sg follows s
1. :atuMtod h,drocarpons (oolorlsss molid), 2 .4:.7 g.
2. Tt:o unsatvrztod hqdrocarbon oompotimd A2-2a (pal,o 741la+
=i -0olZd), 5 .6 1 64 g.
U^ t*=l,ad h;-d:ocarr,ora ot : er ttstn compcurd A2.2

(3ro31ov oil), 5 .908 g.
;. ..i. a*~d ss`~ =« „_ c h~ocar o ...s
4. '
àr ..va VdV~uL Wì~WW~MYiV~t ~~~'~i1Y, \ adVr .wl JV~~~ .
?hS.s rsyrrssc-its a total of 16 .51,.8 g. or 96.6 percant recovery.
?Y:o Iatt,:r i:rct.cn ( .tt . 2.4C9 g1) L4s ccW~`^cd ;'r-ctivm 2

(elutcd bJ 15 percent ton : or.a in hc=r.o, vt . 3 .E61 g . ) fzrcr. the proccd"-
:r.g chrcr.:.',a" .W. to elvo w o ; oI-,rcyc :.: a arc:.wtic hrcl .Mc~.~ :An ca::cc :~ ts
`~vt . 6 .350 30) as ohcra :l i_^. F1crwsL•.eat 3 . Ztis :ratcsrS.al, in bonzo:^.o aolu-
t:.cn, hcd a docp ti ::a :':~ rcccc:..^s .n •.1~Qiolot lieht w! :er o;.a '.:.z
vntori^ , not in soluticnp tluoroscod bluo-pnon in ultravio :.ot Iicht .
a VV4 .~Wlij AZ L is an W A+ .W M+irVa h7 ra V = r cn w h

ycM • = 4
V o^_
c M{.rfM c +W. ! in thio

YGrY 7
Mivi W1I t 8i r q 'S."3 W
M bVr . -- of tK .~ Cr.wr gt
2 S c P :cnfl =0 :ac ,41 OC 1 :::.•cd 2:czd to t :=1 t"o =c1r .Tuio h--3
double bonda . : edLct :cn elvoa a sa =-V+.od b7+d.Moc.:.~tcn •.ritu fo- .,!a
o f t=1-9 5t.~ .:ctL."`9 0f C~..~*'ÔL4d A22 i v = be
described in a cubsoquont r"S .R.
I
.r~*°"±~a'^^'' ;, ~ ?~y ~~ q;;? :-"'~c ~, • _~L~, .. C •
• w wr~~
.~L . ,r = ' ~
; ~ ~.; ~ ! ( Fi: r. CÎ'~7 1)
r . y ~ ~-^• .. ..~^?
(~i'FS'-
~ . .Jtir1 ~
6 . .~t: ~.~ .~. :~.. ..~. .':1 ~
:~ ; ; • ~ . ., ., . . . ~ ..
5.9.:C ~•
Cr.r^=togrzph on alumfna (45 ~ . z 250 ~. )
i:e.xa~e
w w
., . .^ . .~~
_ • .~ L2
! O .PC7 r%
V
0 .949s. ;1 .731g. t1 .211g.
, osttnrstod
3 ' Cocrourd ~ ua: aturat,ed ~ t:.^.aat..-~tad t:
A i- 2 b:rc'.rocarboas ~ ar-C Vwt io rvcao-
I Ca:•~Cr.3, e~t0."~
t
I I
S Cc=b :med with oir! Za- i`rac t3or. s ~ to BJ d r•viN 2, v f
~ 41
W `Y
~.• ? =.12
2.48.7 g• 5 .6C4 go 2 .439 go

total total total
~ .•C .~ a :
..~ 4 ..•
VC .~ ~ ii
w i•
..6
g._C! 7.-.,-,etZ=a2hZ
DJ'sc:~~y1tS
Cr.romtography of the polfcyalia cro=tic rydrorarbn cor.centrato

( 5 . 390 g. ) on al%=ir.a ( A 1=in'.~ W-do 1•:erck) in e coltsn 45 x . x 250 trz.
=ploying hcxane and tenzor.o-hexano eolutions as eluting solvente gave
t.r.a !a1.:rtii:_a -min fractiors ( seo Flcvaheot 4 )t
1L iiT:BL` tL .^"tltcd h,Jd : cca :'to.^`8 ., 1 . 2g0 e .

2. Pr=tio IWdrocarbens ( qery ,a1s b1Lo .°lucrescexo),
0.426e .
--ar-1-L4.alono-t7Pe of
arc=atio bydrocrr':cn.
3. Aroc$tio lqdrocartrona ( intense blue-vY~..ita fluoreacence) s
0 .1.23 g .
'!'yo vrricus fraot :o" . aonotitutir.g thia rain fraction
Cavg u1•.:-z7io:.: t aI,0or ;.*Aon 3zcctra (F:ec...~:un DR, 1.0-=.
s_lica cc7.lc, abcclute otr.ar.o2, 25" C . ) vit.': abcoration
at 3A^C, 3 ; 5, 355 and 374 t-p c .h.rro.ct.oristia of the
s +!^~sco~e-,r, .~-er.e~•:"rono-tppc~ of nrcT..;.tic hxrocarben .
4. A rozbtic b7drocarbons (deep purplo-t11ue riuorosconce )j,
1.11.6 g.
The varioue frrctior.a constituting this cain fraction
•
g.: .o ul+a~aviclct ahco Ytrcn spcct :z (1'oc'=n DR, 1.0-=.
ailiea cel:s, atsoluto eth:. .^.ol, 25° C . ) taith at3crpticn
tax4mci at 256p 2F.4, 342, 362, 379, 3C6 and 4^4 rJ .t
aw : acteristio of tho p7rer.o, %l,•bon: r~: e ::o an d 1,Lu•
hQ.^.co ;eryle= g.^cup of escmtio h7drocarbans .
5. aosidls (1.9(C6 g . )wha ;,b wi1.1 b4 == .',.i:cd •Ji•,a tho
tenzono•ol•atcd :aterial f:om the initial cr..^=tcgr=
(Flavsbeet 2) .
FractSon 1 abm (1 :2E0 g. ) s:a rccr.roratographod on alumira (25 =* z

2&5 = .) wing hexane as the oluti ::g aolvont to givo 0 .433 g. of
=saturated h7drocarbons a .nd 0.716 g. of naphttalor.o.-t7e-o t:y3roca rbocs
adn.:r.ad xit5 nnsaturated 2qdrocarbona . Zhis lattor tractSon vae
conanod vit5 Praotion 2(0 .426 g.) and 2»vooty~i,eci as dcscribcd in ~
Flavahoet 5. `' N
m
Ln
m
N
m
27
.
U :Rt P 4'lY.GRA M Y C E :^ ..:.:...,.~...
FR . 2 . F'if ;•'Fi ; . '? 2
5.330 C.
Chroratog=Fh on alumim
, r C=.no t 5 '"2C I .rNJII:.8T.13 ~ :~At .~'~ol

I 3' Lon:.eae . o:;.$t ore•• I
~ h= ne hex:4%O
;
~rLi 7 7 1, .i
C
1 .28 G' . 0 .426 Q . 0.123 g. 2.146 g . L9E6 g.

1;:.t'iut.LT^.. tC,i e3ter8 r7.ath . YCene, 3,,G-bcr.:.-
2 :7:rocarton, :.arht; d14T08 yhonant,:.z/enos, Y:j': C .^•C tj j.e
ostcrs, ostora
ra;btba]er.oa
i
c• r
on a.l1...r..a \ _
I
1 . 1 _
5~ .z . S
To e LC'ti:ar~r;:T 6 To s IlWS ME"T 7
i: '(.= .^.9 i F C.3 :a .^.e

I
. ..'K ~
:R , _
z • F,
'
~
.~urOQ3S{~7 'L8 (
~
.. . r. . v
• . . :- ..Iw
•V
.. WIL .Lra• ~
ma ° ."Lti m, 7 t;~J i^ . , ., . C1'M~`y cF t~l Fr'~f~~ ir!Tg
T! r
7 .I ~ ~+~7A~ ..
l.CEb g.
~ Ctsxstoeraph cn nhwmi :-z (25 c3?. s 1X

I Elute vSth hasaae .
Fv . z- ~~s,- 10
I
o . 9e~
~ Yo3~? .
e atera ~ ra,.ht..a.e
.er. ~
,4A ~ o9tE7T9
b ydPOQarb0B8
ChrcmatograFh on ahcias
I
~
7me . 12rg .
" . p . 69-790 Ctt
nltrav~.olot atsorp.•
tlcn cpectr . inCicates
mpkthalera uith trsces
Ot ~^nnlt`~7t~"`flf;^~l
~ubl4.-od
~ .
Residtze t*i: LY ^' .~ L'.~ L
5 ",g• n. p. 79 . 5-80. 5° C.
29
rJ . ? ;-nlct!^r: w,j '^P-ti''1ca'ic' : c'' tho -^d+•TS~ ::rl Foi^c--c11c
g, t'apttlP3cro
':?:o napt :t.~alono fracticn (1 . C°6 g. ) vas chrcr=:to , 4-1-od on ai
.....irs
(Alunia= Oxi,4o Merck) in a colacn 25 = . = 250 rs* u .ing hox:.no aa t.ho
olutinF oolvont . A total of tan fractions (L50 c.l, of aolvont) vere
collec±ed . Ccr»':,:tiono vero rcco on t»s t~sia of atoccr ;,t:ea
t* c' :e :~ ctioac ~ctioa (C .C2q g . ) t~ s»a.n .' ..w.
r lovehoot 5 . +
Z;ai3 mator iai vaa rec ~ rcr.ztorrs,r.»od on al=-i na as before to e-vo a

flracticn, vhich on evaporation contained 7 srC o of a colorlo3s, cry3talli .:o
.0 j==aea of .,: "ti'1 ~'.a .2"@ . ws.~ '' `"`C :+Ms:
0014d L•3 t!! t1 :' .f"
.+ t19 C_C:'
'? A w j a'~r~ +.
69 - 75° C . rltr-ar'.olot atccrj tion str.dias (Eeck : an DK,y1 .C+-cw. si2ioa
cellst, r.et»anol, 25° C . ) ir.dicatcd tho -Ixeaer.ce of napht?~.alor.o contar.inatod
with a_a_h_t .~,.:1, c_ (r.nx.4m* at 324 and 339 ay) .
CtU'
.~ :::.ti - of twa cater :a1l gave a coic:iecs cryo 11^ ao .14d, vt.
ZO o s t '6 - V . ..• ~_ : .~.. .a . L.~ .~
/C ~"
: ^
.. . . d . .a ~
.• ca
r. „
~y, ~. ... . .a•"
...u
, . V. . ..~ ;:. .._ ._oaa r
and iafl~-~ared ataorption spectm of t: is cater~'..a1 wcro ia3entical with those

of an aLt : er.tia sampls of âc»+.,»ale,:o .
?he rrx!= obtained in the ultraviolot ubsor ;.t:on spcctr= (icc:Waa

silica collo, ~et,'-.aziol, 250 C . ) of the sn»1i :..ed c~an; Io were
at 2 ;6, :66, 273, 276, 2F~, 2,1-.6, 2;7, 301 .0 3C6 and 311 r)a (cf .(41)) .
Calcu:.ation b:.3ed on oovorrl of t»oce i :dicatod the ;reaenco of
1.67 r-G, of ;ure na,^,ht.".alcne in the suhL• ..~xd raWple.
A mie. L:"a C pC :^t of tr0 = te r!az (y . r . 79 .5 + CC . ~° C . )

wh th an aut .*.octSc sa;.plo of r.zr»t.»alor.o (r. .p, 81,0 - P„1 .5° 00) gave no
dc ,. e3s .. .II
n ~ : . j . of M:.~~.W O, ctî . .7 • G~1.C-0 C . ~ .
b• ~nt~ ~. ~Ms
1. CcT.C .A Z"'~•GIVFIR
Tt:e c:Mor.,atoCra,p~,~, identification and c .u.aractori=tion of

an•,,: racer.e are o .arized Sn Flovs»aot 6 . Cr.e t:-action of tho init!a1
chrcr..3tot:-= Cave ar, ultraviolet absorpt4on s~.ect: ~ i:.dies°,~:.
:.:.Z
.Z,~ L`:o
.
fi+re .9p. .7ce of
^~"Anf`w+{•rqwn•
2. CF o .tS
CC, IV F'um
An authentic aw.rle of acid cc rlex wa3 r:ro- iLn

~
,.~ .red according to tho zothcd
"" O;:•',..'w
_..ad by r ieaor (4C ) irca~
1. 0,, . ~
. C ;v U
~r.^.IL'3 ) o f a7:.̀. .:. CcÂ L :: :. N
. C~ C . C~Jj z O. I ts ) of f+^"~
.. . ~ m
Ln
boa : or.o ga4o the snthra,cer.o-;:c.-.c acid cc._^ ^, .1~, ~. p. 1: :. -1.:3° C . m
N
W
30
:~, j7, Ct'"Tw ~ p .*~n? .+t.*~!T~ .

~ Z~~Is^hTT ~.
~ ~ r . .
1
T
0.3:3 E•
-x
; ., . ..;.. C n c.l•=! :-.a ( 25 -~ .
Z: toaaeno-hoxanc~ 1N ceazoaa-hex= .^ò

Eoccaas ' ~
Fu F~-7
~ .
._ i
i
31r.C1ar
3 76 ~' .t:•sr:c3^s?
L.L.nnnw+1 .w
Cst e^3 C t•A
Cr,rcr;to..= ; ,h on aaicic acid

. (25 z~ . x 100 r~ . ) .
:oxsce 1~ ~onza :.o-c~ ~ ^

~
rt~. 2..b
23 r..3 0
45 ry• esters?
ant ~=acor.ep
estore
Treat vith F.icz'io

acid in tea :eme.
- ~ .~,T .) r~•• ;~
. .,
( ~..~~ c cl•~ = :.a (25 .~» s1:0-_.)•

`1,,
fi CT{ C % Ca a
42 =g .
Ch.~^.,s•„o~r:= ; h ca
1.r~
~ 25 = . : : 1s0 M .1 .
r
r?, t
:~.. .--
7. ~ .
.=,=
1 32 . =,-;
`Y
?IC:iC ACID
6 .5 =- .
Z..., n. . ^v-1..1
~~~ . 50
I. A
= .r . . ; : .W .~ .
Crr -. :-zta--cr.
~. cc
(4-5 = . x 1C0 =a.) .
T
Pierio N cid , A • 4' r. T
~. ..~.`..._ ~ .~.. ..._s.
. ..
r .p. 196-21r:0 C.
Crys ^ "co : rcr: =oLl=.:a2,
t. p. .^.L`6-21i o C . ; L.a . p . 212-213° C . '
4 .103 _:-,' :? s-oct .- -
Chra:.ic acid in r.cctio acid
~.~..~.
~I~.. wn . ..
~
~M A A
. . .p . /./irR. .C.G~ N . ; r
.. .M .p . C.
31
R h i.- t,_tvo tai11l rra= of t::o cr.t~~ccc ::c-cstc: Li- c aL.~o (coo
h
:1c43 Cet 6 ) ~'Jv0 6.5 arr . o r the SC i d ccL'^-'=
orploying the aL•ove prccodure (40) . I"= zolt :.nv ;.fliat of the c=-
pl= ti:0 21.:} •. 24211 C . a.^.d a risak e roltinv point with t2%.o aut%xntio
c=plo gave r.o doa*nro3sioa (140 . 241950 C .)•
Cecc==cssticz: of the cntrrrccnc-p :crio acid cc-lr.: rj c!^ro=tc•

, :ar+~7 V .^. .~.r,'..i.:a. fl.^) c-:_:r?csa sol ..d, r . ;;• 1%b - :1;)° C .,
1n1~1 ..~ .0 ~.
S. - Y :1 a ~+3. . .~ t w .r .n. .~ .:v . C. . .. C.. ~ .I Y. ...rrr ..
1/ /~lr
t :o :1 riva`~
.. = t+S"..Z :1o.L Cava t
w: w..1-w'. : c1.-nC) m .p• 2C6 • F:. ..ro C. A L..LZLw -0
tôltir.g point vit/ an autlhontio a=plo (r.aot..n Y.odsk) # z .p. '216 -
21?° C .i =a1tod at 213 - 213° C .
:to abovo sEn rlo of onth~ ccno uaa disaolvcd in 2 .0 /rl, of

acot_o acid . Cno r.i2l .~tor of this colut :.cC «V.x r c:w":od :cr 1L
. of crr c^3c me-co in a colut_cn of 0 .75 r3 . of acotic aci.-vith4cC :
^ .15 =i . of Lr,a„~: cccc-d{m .^, to tho sctrr.3 of Craoro a:3 L+orc-. ::a
i .'i .,
;~ ~ ~,f~~ . .
. ...:ot .. .~
.m t .~CM of w 4 L .0~~.
rp . .in .~ ....0
.r ...~•~ A" Y .. ,• .~
~~ ~..R' Q~ r .. ~@.~'V ftrzl .-.-0~
ty e:;~ ct! cn with a total of 10 r] .. cf Y.cn: ono, g`.o rr ~rquf.:ar.o-

9, :,^ .
7bis rat,or3c1 trra Isrif'.od by c:~sc=ao~r : 7 ca a1t..:- Lml ar.d
cr7~ t.:3~: a! oa f5r= mothnnol to g.vo 1on; 7ol1c~.r noc,dloo of ar.t.~ ~~
~- 42W C. A .ri:c t•.:ro =oltinc I:c :.z:t with an
F:u+..y fl ::+.. ! c + :. .'.'~j. 1o S .'".. .p• "MS . 2t CO Ci of EuCo n o C 0 "r"C :+C 1 C .^. ( .". . -e • Z I cJ ~
..n . .. ~
. f.o i»O= '~ a Ln• .~ ..•^. 3 t c0~
. .aJn of t~
J ... J
Ic . .l~
.l ~ l . . . o ..+
: j . ~ 7 w~nt C ..Jn
. ..1 Lr..'..9
!dect.ral v:th that of an auth.entic sarrlo.
G EP-C ;^s
"'^ ~' L- v3olot ::ccL~..n M,,( 1 .C-cr. ailica, ccl:.op, absciL+.,3

1 ..0 1..~ ~ •M ,
e tM~Mcl, ~.5^ C. ) and r ! p-

rn-}}}rMr VM V YJ C jlY cn s octrM of ;t:.V Yr.t.. .' f.cV.re
vor o idcntica71 with thoso of an authontSc =plo .
^.Y:o L:1L:mviolot atoorpticn =::rica Lcro at 253, =46~ 310, 32d,

342, 3 .`, 5, 370 and 373 :p (c :. (!«2) ) . Calcj'.,:.ticn b.:ccd cn the
x-..nq at 34 .?0 35s and 3?3 L-p ita3cated tho proser.cs of 4.03 r.C . of
c:: tM--ccenc in thA s~lA ; rior to c~^.,:ractmi .-,ticn as tho aa~.-~^....
qta.~c:.or3~ : ^ . Ln
~
~
Ln
~
N
pro_:C C :'.."": ::t^` "' .. 1.. .~ ta, ..J.Jna . ..^. ti cn °'
and C4 :' :: c:' a e. i ^.t:o'.1 o f
3,G•be.w,-j : or.o aro out,1 'i::,d :: cct::.1 in 'r'2ovobcct 7 .
32
... . . _ . ~ .~ . .. . . . . . .. .. .. . .., .. .- ., .. , . .., .,~.. .,
. ..-V7r.•
B7 7 . .
~. ...~~. .. .~ :+.~ G
i. 146 €.
Chr = LC cm~yh Oii J33'^ m (c5 ~.x1?5
' S' =L!:e:• . ~ 4,'• ?'er :aô-- :

:Qy`w . .w
w-
.. . .Q
~r ~ r41
: cza-s ~ r :oxa«e ~erxs:a
~ . .. . ~~=u F? .
'IV
0. 3220 E . 0. 074 Z. 0 .055 0 . ; 40 ~,+ .
03 t8r 8 7 1r,:-0 ::0 ) 3,1.-ben:.. 1,12 ..1,e czo-
t'h:or~,.at,*:or.e pm TO pery1@Do I
A w M.YM Yr .1Mo ra
4 V`r~CYY ;:h n
YCLi r M
r QT3@ amd
a O F'j oilioia ccSd
tl= raat: e:e (25= . z?.0= .)x
iaolatioa
N . QlII g. C . OIS
C Vb.V1VN - i {N• 3,Y'VV .wir~V^0 1f~Y .~ C L~C .1 Q\•~S~.VV
I
c a p io V+VQ.g { i^ "v ~
..• , b27 con iwA .'i n.+rn(= J . î.W r'L• W
3,4-banzFyrezo ) .
i C:-r:.1t O,r-^ rh C .^. ca: A (15w .

Y y
.. . .
"'
_ . • 1-2 .~~~ . .3
3 m c^.
I C}rcra tcrr =b oa :.2 :: i=
~
.. .~. .~.
v .I ,' - i .îj° .î .
+ J v : . .n.«
.~ .. .4. :a :.oi •
^+1a~..r±C+ 3 ,G - .1~~.. .. ..~
.~ ? IM
.- . ~.
:: . . .,
(m.p. 172•1'?'S° C .
Crystsllize !`roc mett~.aaol.
~
^_-_ . +r I 4_^r . .. . _..r. _. . .~
s., .~
~ C.620 rC.
I = . p. 175•179° C .
, - ...-.,...... .
,
1. 296 ag. in rixtti:re
~ :resL vith picr .c acid in

L ~bca^.eno .
~~~H+~~lf0
;- . .~L-z _ .
.T', 'liT
Cr :'r ~;2 Cl~ . r _z'2
c.p. 17E-1~3 m .p. 155-1?0
Cr,rstallize frx
bonzor.o
y I
DT CO T r !(; r,
_
pTC--TC ~~CTn
. •Ci
~i~ . . .,i~ . .r~j'`'`'4.%'
w.p.19C-5°om
.= .p. no
doprossioa
Co--b-ir©
I
Lrr ^ .,., . .. ., .-~.
..a. ..w~
~ : .. . . om a1•,.:..i:s
r--
-
ricri c Aîd
\ ;/
~ . ..i .~~~ ~
~ M /~
l. .L.V = v.
= .p . 1? .^-1%7' C . ; =.Zi.p*
r.o ae ; r ossicn
L'V aad "m srcc :. .-a agrco .
3
.. ,.~ .. . ,, .. . ... _ ., , . ~ „ C .
*.• ~. : . . .. ~r . . .'.1 .. . ~ . .~ --
3~~ :.~ . .r .~l . . . .
, . --. .. .
r i. :j ~ ~L . . .rL::.G~ .~~
FIC=IC ACID C•' ~:: .._..
_ :.Y '
of
~ w w . .iS .
• .. .. . . . .~ ::~+w
.. . .. ww~
. ......w~w
~ i ~ .. «rw.j.~ . r. :.r
- . r ..
j.- . .. ~ .w. ..wrj~: iri^-1~'.x vt..
prepcrad accordine to the motbod of Fiener ( 40) . Z'ni3 cs torial

¢eltod at 195 - 1980 C .
x o outlined in ?lc•,r : boet 78 the 3il.-bon :,pyrono ccr.car.trate fr cm

t}:e 10 # 5CO CtiN.rL ciE^sctte r = vt s co=hir.ed vith a sirilar 2`rsc tion
,rw
!'r a ci Ctr.:tte r .--. cVntai .wi. in- y ZL~~ L' ~ . of
3,4-:n .^. .t.;:cro. :l:o co .:tined ccr.ccntratas were`rxL`'icd ~f !o ;rsticn
of tho ric: i o ac:d ccr.plox . ::da complex r.altod ct 190 - 195° C . ar.d
Cavve ;:o dcFr oraicn of the irelt3 :.~; poi nt vith tto authentic sa_-.pl.o
,.~: sparsd a !:ovo .
.7hr~to~,, .~j of t~o 33~-ye••~,; or.o-picri0 :.a: cc_~lax Cavo

a s=71e of 3#4-ber.c ;,yr eaei ic . p . 170 - 1750 C ., vhicW ravo no reltir.e
;oint deFroo3ion with an authontie caaplo`(a .p. 178 - 18^^ C.) .
3 . Ap!'CF:PT2Gtl "r7PrEC':F.A
:"1:e L'_tmviclat a:A iz .flta.Mcd ab3orption r;:ct ra cf t : :is sao

rlo
were identical vit? : thoce o .° an aut*entic s=r1e of
I :2:e ultraviolet ab3orytion caxt= (Locl=uan riC, 1 .C-= . silica

colls, abflclute ethanol, 250 C . ) vor e at 255p 2E8, 275, 2:7, 297,
34°, 3E.G, 3?7 and 403 z~if z -^ at 253, 2731 ::9-1, 295, 371 w.d 397
cp ; aI:culdor at 330 m in a~ccreat vi .h the pi:blS,16-ed ul:.- .:v'.clot
atrc :rtion cpectr= (L7) and tho opectr= of Eun aut~o :.tic cr.~ple
( rnst=n Xcda ;c Chomica13,, Distillation Products Ir.dustrieo ) .
~
Ca : c'.:: .aticn tascd on UMo u1t .-avio? Et a :cc: rticn at 31,9,
r
^w7 ~ ..,~ 4~,n3
I'~ .r.. .. .t~ ..wa
rp . ~
.. w .. .r ..,•
.r~f:
r~f:
d•
•S "
w .ojv`~ .~ of~1 .a7
..o ..~0
.
^ of 3,4.tE
rr':`B :0 :~ ~«3 8"OICB L`C .^. .^.~Zlratii ::^ :w 131 CLV C~. .`•z 3.
.^~ . ..i{li",n
..*- i.a;'i~`~a' .•i1e
1. Cf' :1CY.1TCCRr. F~:Y
The fltoranther.e-ric*a f-*-ct.cr.3 S:ro~ the 1C, `^C.` C' ::?.iL ci C:.: rtte
( C . :.41 G . ) and a3 ;,,C aiCa,-etto run .( 0 . %70 g . ) kGrfl cc,:,-
i b4
Chr=-to ; ra j"7 of thin raterial on al=ira did : ot rcrr..it iool : -

t:.on ot' c«;-3talL:o .l::cranthe: o duo to an oay ccnt,A::rnar.t.
. ~
!. , C . ... . .a- .~`1 CF wrLi.'if-?
~ ..~... ~.
~F n .~; :..~:,J!a rl..:C.: . . . .: .s...~ . ... ..1 . ~~
FL::CmE:CCly3= cn
~
J
vr. 3 pr.~,T.a :"Lil: W t ho
= t .", oc o: ::ckey 03) rs :oL'C• ; o. m

Ln
m
N
~
•
'71ê fluora .^.thono-r;chu frcction (0 .4C0 g .) vas dinsolvrd in 1.5
r.1. of varW (60° C .) Flacial acotic acid . 1, solution of- l,0 cC . of
2,49?-tr:r.itrofluorenone ia 3 .5 E1. of boiling glacial acot:c acid
vaa nddor3 and the resultinQ eolution vaa a13.oWOd to cool apont:.•u*-
ously to 25° C .
Finci ?eLl.aw-orr.r.Ce ncc.~c2es Frecipitsted aftor 2 hov+-s . Tnose

wc :ro rcccvoz•ed ~ ;~ ..:.d uer a :~s'~cd vit, ~2 :' . of cold
(0° C . ) haa::r.o to ~-ire z:.terial •lith an ir.definite r-olti .*.C Fcin t.
Chxror.atogmpby, on aliw,.i:.a deecWiosed the eoe,^.3.ez and Eavo !"racticna
with ultraviolet a : sorption apoctra cP.c.ractcrLstio of r- ; ~eno, f3.t:or•
ant3ser.e and :'ae flucrant::or.e3-r'..ch fr actions
vere ccrt_.xd, coaccnt: rt : d and zCain troatod with 2,4,7-trinit .-•o-
fr•,:oreacae in g1acS.a3. .acot3c acid aa before to eive ye13oW need3ca,
~. p. 201 - 210° C . ' A risture r.el tirg point ot the fluor : nttbor.o-trL-
nitroflucrenone coQplooc with an authentic aacpls (75), c .F . 214 -
215° C . ,,rsve no dopr ocs ion .
êcc- :csiti cn of •.tc f?i:cr ~+.rono. .t.~ir.i ~ of'! »o .~a_no ccw^lex on

(25 =, x 1C0 .. - )Cave fhar^,.nthor.o, :. p . 103 - 1:E° C . A
cixtL,.•-,o -altinC point with an authentic -^le, V-.p. 1L'7 - 1C9° C .,
Zt7a no ae ;--assicr .
3 . A-EFORPTieN CFECIMA •
4ho first fraction Sr= the '_a ttor cr.rcratoCra.: gavo an ul *..ra-
vio :ct c :ccrytion Epoctr=vith =:= at <62, 274, 3G0, 328 and 3G3
r7i . ;'hooo r,acSr..a coir.cide with t .':o; e for the hydrocarbcn,
.r~r.~ (45)•
V1V• ~ •r •dV IYW~~V .i CM MrvGL•w.I V •~ ~r •~~ "
the ^yr6Sfl~~0 of 2 .95 «.c . of fNL'Cr:::.t::C ::3 in ;WMo =Cf'a CC» .': .^+r«.a :9 ~
, +e ult:aviolot abaorpticn r-& :r'.= were at
14 , 0,00 C1'/ZIM ci ga:•otte3 . "Y
2b1, 2'17, 22?, 3C°, 322, 341 and 358 =,p ( cf.(43),10
Ln
~
4•_ -4
N
m
. . "S iSYSz i J.TRIr:I :?~FLLCP.i'
' : A F-3 C~r?.ILA'*IC:1 0? 'r'YRE.M -E
cn
C ..~ .. LE x m
w
m
"1:e r* ;: vno-r:c.ti f:actiocs :~ the 10, 50^ cica:êtte :n:r
nnd th.e 3 ;Ca V : CL o:C--:ot',a uaro coWbinc; , C .ccclved !:. 1.0 wl4
of glac :r.l acotic acid Mr.d tr cYtcd wi t» 02.0 r.3, of
f.uorer.c :.3-9 in 0.5 r.1. of bo!' w E.'.ncio .lZ acz.t:C acid. A rod
c:iata2l:co solid p .-rocip:tatod ca cooling r clid a :`tcr ti.;.c;:-
inL with c.'•.illed bozane (1 .0 «,1., C° C . ) and drjinC, coltsd at
35
C : :t w_th an aut: cntSo s:r; ?o (?5), r .p.

2.:2 - .^.43° C., waa 235 - 23?° C . Me inflcarod ahso :ption oroctrs~
of thia ~tcr :al wa3 idc :~tic :1 with that of an aut::ontio o=p1o of
pyrone..triaitrofluorenono eocplmc.
The eocp,lox uaa dcc=pooed oa a1=,trs to obtain pyreno for

ultraviolet 8tsorption ottt3ivs . . • .
2. A wCRI:"T07 ^ PE C TA °Jl
Clt,.~violot abscrYtSon atudios (Pocl=n EX, 1 .C-.^-- . aiLcs co].3c,

abooluto eUanol, 250 C . ) on tho pyror.o obtained ty deco=,position of
',l:o co--plex ind icated a rir.3.n= of 1.36 c;,. of pyrcr.o in the ocrYlw-
oat• i'rco 24,000 C':mL cigarettes .
- :Y6 ultravio2et abcc:rticn =x:m wero at 262, 2?<^, 293, 31d, 334
ead 3?2 a}3 in aCreezont witb trcae of an authantie aarp1o (cS . (44))•
. . .0 1~ . _e~...,ct,,.
., did ..,,,
_ ... .. . ..
., ..., .., . ~ ..r.v,+ . . . . .,
..»,..~.~
ter.:; 3thr, cono for ico?atica or cr ::ractori :.ation . :he ultrasiolot ah3o rp-
ti^.a (Iccl=sn DK, 1 . ,~ . ailica co11a, ab3o?ute etY~.: no1, 25° C . )
wero a t L6,0_ , ~~ 2 C9 j 3'.'..~ 3 2 70 i~~..~r, 357] M z.+.d. 3.:v -.-,u a.: a '='c.:c.^. :i ~..~.
z t i '
published data (46) . ?Y:o eat:=ted quantity of 1#2•ben :8athrace'ne vas 0 .16
to 0 . :2 A. por 1Co cig^...rcttos .
:Y:o iaforration on t2hws L .atie hydrocarbon was obtained L7 !11.-action•

at_ :` t!~c r.c4+..rrl fmctia :: obtained fmn t ::o 3`.C' ' :r:7
cil-
.-r otto :^.m. :l:e ultr aviolot absorption rr ..-inn ('.Ec~:n CX, 1 . Cti-= .
3•f»~ reL`s, cyclchcw.3, 25° C.) were at 291, 303,0 331, '~.4-°, 3tx, 3E3
a:d G :..° n,u (c . . %"4C)) .
The evidence for this aroratio rqdrocarbcn was tho ultraviolet atzorp-'
tion naaiira at 408 ond 432 rp (of . (49)) .
()1
m
W
t-A
3d
•
Z2:e r.ain ir.tcroat in tbe 1=esonce of tho Fo37cyc3 :c arc.:,: tSc byd:ro~.r'rons
in ci,ârotte ccrwvr.3=Yo .'„^- t.':..t r...^; cf ': vrc cr::ra~.::.3a ~ro ~c:ra to ho
carcinoConio (53) to variouo sFEciao of aai .,~.aU. She cur: ont cer.trovoray con-
ccrr.ir.b the ir.fluonce oP cigarotto smo ::i::g on t,' :e incrotoir.e ihciCCr.co of =naor
o_: the 1:.^:C in t.`:e ~:~..a.^. r..-3o ilg, 3L, 35 . 36, 51, 52, 60, E6, 6?, 71, 72, ?4a
j n ~ 4 ~" , ! 17 , 11^ l ~~S = ~ ,~et ~'nern c n++1A~
. L . .I ~. ..~ .Y. . ~.. ~'C' C'ri~
br~
V C'ri~ :'r
:'r V Vr
V .(~ . A
ar'
./. .. ~1 data iwd .caj„e t'~
.M t t:•:ê is a a:.~ V~
- '^^~onSc
'^^~on
..VL in c .•-cro•to
Sc factor '^ C V ./ ;: :r~
densato (119, 120) . ihis c:..rcscreaic . ..cto : rosSdc3 {: the ^.cut:: 2
fraction of -the cwoke casden°ate (121 ; arA 13 producod p : iza.-i1,7 by p;:'ol"si :
of the tobacco durriw„ the e='r.i^g yrocoas (121) .
In vi :r.~ Qf t fd;,ta, :: is loCica to accc; o that L : e c:: c .:c~,cac aca :: ,

of cit rstta sr oko condca:ate ia due to the precor.ce of or.o or =cre carcinoceaic
gol;cqclio aroratio rydrocMr bons . 4l:o presenco of aeverhl of tho pollc-clio
2r-drocart':.r,s in c_Lc~rotto cnoko tzs boen des :cns+,ratcd by t,x.o .-,wc:o korlxre in the
•.ritsc: cta+.e9 r.nd a}.road, r.rir.circllf trj moano of ult~wiolct cxct .-~cF:cto~ot . .
!j..rc9 vcry iitt?o actua.l i: clsticts n4 cua :ratoriration work haa bevn rercrtod
in tho P:ct, this con3titutos twe ra :.a oi;3ect of the ;xcse--t recc :~.rc:.
7'h= 14 ;rl^-clic arc-*rtic r:,M'..rres~r.3 vhrc'~ have ei+w'^.er heon S :.c2;.t,-d ar

identified in the noutral fraetion of eie.~rette scoke . cc n:ona:.to are as fou~ ~ :
Acor.a;h•,~yle-:o (3C ?9), nntrsacono (2I, 30, 31, E2, 849 99), artranthrcr.o
a~uler.e (6, 54, 703, 1,2•ben :,anthracer.o (61, 70, 79), l,L^••boazorerilor.e (30, ,
'79) 3,G•bon: r,~ : ore (6, 20, 30, 33, 32, 65t ?0, 79, 99, 114, ]35), 3-=t1 :-~l~rer.c
("~
, , ::rhw'^s~
1 cct^s~~-so
.^.e :32r 79, 9'9~ :o (115N
~ ^„rfh:orant .: erA ~~ti1'_5`~r
•,~r /
. . .^ (^1 '1Cr '~lr '!^
..
.? ..~.l e..~ 11 .~
. . ( . .., . ._ . ._. ..,.+4
..~ .i ~-.1+nnw . . . .. .+...
. ..
.0 ~'!^
.-~^^~,
~+/w~ n ..rl .w.....
. : ...., ,.of . .,_ ..
79, 115) .
.'cr.o, 1,12•Leaôpe:~,lo ::o :Â
Cf the iacntir :a_d , cc~.~.'cr.o,
.i c aetiT.t7 in e~e :
rJ•: oro u_nce not .ean testo• S'or c.: ..rc~-~w~e.^.ic
to 1951 ( 53)• Cf tt'~e ro :,oir.dcr uh:c:: r.tve been tested for car ci .mcric
activ'.tj, Fart-well (53) 2sts r.arht..alcno, acor.arhttyloao, an th .~acene, Fha
threno, fluor.--thene, per•fleno and anthantr.reno aa boir,g r.or.c:..-c3noCoaic .
?Eccnt77 hovevor, L`ruaIc :y acd ~ cx ..-x~hl (37) describad the c^:rcinogenic :.ctivity
of antr.raceno in rats which developod t=orc on Wection with th :.s hydroc:.-hon,
:'Me 4 rowa'.rulr.3 i:JdrocrrL'onc, 1,2.benconthracor.o (10, 22, 103), chrj ccr.e

/!! !) !A 1r~ ~. . . .r1^ 1nG% . .w .i .. ..« . . . .n O1f"N . ..p~.A4 .ii M+ .~ .-inwr~e
.., ., ~a, •~~ •. ._, b . .. . .. ..~v . . . . ... . .~~ v ~
c.rc~nic zct :v ; ;;t whereas 3,4'2zn.~r^M-cro s hiC :a, ~ca rci .~oc cr,ic ( ceo ~ .~I
fcr ro'7 refcrencca to the c .zrcinor-.er.ic activ4_t7 of ",.:ao com-rour.d in ',»e Wousse
( 41 st rai-w ), rrt (9 otrcSns)r cui= pi6, h:ster, rabb.it, rigcon, fcu3 a-•d
Dcvti•
'.a ::'Scr.tad !_n t2 :o :x ;:er=.::nta1 :'ection of thin reYort, 5&o+ ; c;clic

.^•_~c t...'
...: ..r. .. : .. r . 4 ^ ' ..+~_ . :-... .:,»
....,.or ~.^
..e,; "o ;~
!-:vo teen _so?ntodt iCent :.fied ied ard -c:::..-actericed d in th ; cr_e l..io~.~t..^ .~-; in t~;
h~ r.e-soluble, r:eL•', ..rcl', rc.l i`: -atian of C"1-L c .~:.retto cccko ccr.dcnsato . ':hr~
of t*":oco h~ :McarVcr~ -_c= ::c• ^'rr^ro• ~ .G-tQrc-Rr.^ô> ~"r ~, :cêct
: nn ofa.- as c=ca. :ogenio r.et:vit7 13 ccncnrned .
51710 5032
:7
It b~ L~ocn ~:a. ..~

~ c d that
w^t•MYn`• C C c " Yh C C
t .~e
Y
. -
~~^+M^~~+
. V~ . .VL V
r `j s{+•
~I~I
' .~YJ 0 t• .V ~n .F ~V ~
.~•.
V .I~
don.^.nto, or. the box.-no•aolublc, aoutr^..1 fsaction, ia a rarc:tl7 r.uah g•reator

tha.n th: t dco to tro
. i.^.divsc:;:a: cL.~^~^
v•r. . orcnic rzr~roc w
-..~i
~o-:a,
~. • c.r.:''^~
•w ..~ Ccr. , T;" .oco,
Ch- r,7E0 :O~~ &.^.3 3 G•bQ« :r~1"lJ=0 ..'3JC^t (J~« 4 , ._.~..~.~ . . i:a`fA
o~cplar.atsor~a of thin apparont a:oza~y appoar p?ausiblo at procent .
1. "Mo o.:.Mci,~o~r.ic . ic activity o!' t~e hexno•solublo, r.eutral fr~ction

(or vhole ccn3onscte~ ic de:e rz! r.ly to soco hitherto ta,.k=ova povortul :,,~
csrci ::oConic pcl ;, c .-c13c crar.:tic hydroc .:r:.ca .
2. ,1 a ;-r:orgiotio ef!'"t is ottaiôd .pr cc tbe uict.m hJdreear vcr.o .

:2iis pr:eno=er.on has bccn coseribe8 ty ct ..~::erois vorlscrs (102, 103) in the
=so of the po1,7o7c2io a.-or:atic kydrocarbons .
0 1 r . .. - ~c =d :-rec c .t- in 4a4 O nCUt :"'r I .l.icL3 e .î Ci• C.t V :w ttB .' = t.9 Y
. cc tcr.:vir.` as a cocaro inc e (l

l .4r .wYte •8 1 23 4t E , N .., " ., ' M .( , w^' j'.ni,
l<, =W eit: er for ocmo c :zi.ou.•.d in cigtu-oLto onoko or :or 30=o ccm,^-ound
preaent as a ; ol.:ut^..nt in air .
I nce i t i 0
o{J w BiZ o Jti"
r.. . wBi : ~ tr~..~~.t riiii r eHtB e zCjCV LcE s Civ=,4- iC.vCir~r.i
.4 ~.i .w
~w.1d .~.~~...c~aQ~iw - «~0 ~tC~~,~1
•i.L
~w .~ ~•wr
r1i. • ~ . .` W r M Vri
a Y . .w ~r~r vw+~
cir.c-cnio activ:ty of a n=ber of tiio3o ccc-,o•,a.d3, a rothod of either corgete .

. . .C'Jal Or a l= ct cc c-, ::oto of t}7or0 coW p ct nd 3 t`Y'ca c i G..r9tt8 3= :{fl 143
rC"
T£q., :: .-GG a
thia probl,ou : aa tbree ta .ia crFt•oachea .
1. : cr.o cc-,;.•,:: d or Croup of cc;oi..^:~n, e ., the a.3i~:-:tic r,; dr e..

esrbr.s, -. escnt in the tot:cco =y be prcc,.asora . - to t.`:o Fo :7cyclic
cror..atio b73rocn rbon3 presont ia the tobacco =oloa . Zt:ua, a 2ctiror=: g-, of
wo r -~i 1 •,r .. . .
.~..~~~r . , .
..~ew~i. r.r
~~ .~ .r.1. .~ .. ~~ . .
~ wi_~t ~.~o .r~~wt•~ ~ •
eithcr c .^•as.lBtA or ;,:...~-ti .a : rr:val cf this Fr c=ocr S :•cn tto tor,:cro .
L. .~
..Q i .S .~...~,.~.t Cw ~ .~.e ..r ~~v irf
to ;..p.r~Y:i :r.o (~ ^
r,r...,. . ^rDc C .) r;M
eat
.;,-ciaof
o° r.;1 orgw^«•
~ c ~tor ia
iol ;~^~
. ,,..o?
f1ho tob.:cco. :h •, :a p tre co ntcnt of tr.o po1,7c; clio b y droc* r. bc = i n •,yo
smoke r-I ght be l..Mjerec3 17 o: ther lo•.reriag t !:o cozi.-u3tioa to =,-crat•.rc of
the tobacco bclcv 5L"J° C . or by raising tho ccub=tion tc..rc =t.ao atove
E50' C . t7 tte addi tion of suitable Tb eco ca A itives wuot Le
osre^ti=?. L^ ec? .• :'1Csfl , t4?f..C l o30, a :.d ncnt emic , lt t the t.'ê;
=jz t cot to t.'-.o toxcca sc.ci :o cr alteratica
ef wo 093G M +.. : :: 1I f,14-mr2 . ..':+..3 .
,. ~.~•~.e F.c t :.M of cQ:•+iw ia .,n 1 .~.Cir c=!c .wi't orwaJ ~ e * go p fr eC J u.tl Ir`~ wn
cer+t :.in ozr-rtic ecr roz :nas sucb es t: o ste:rols, at r.ic-h terrcr_-tz,•.Me eou:4
w .' i / a
. C3 :r .r .»Z %wfl
. ..w... l
. > . . ..rr~~i
w
t i7.• o :yf~j '
~ .~ v. ~ .. i
w
crr~i
..r .r v ..v
~~,
rriw ::
.'`j1.
'
r~.w
.. oài of +v~e ~
.~• eo o .~uii a' u .~ iv.~.. towCrc . 77 rr ~ .7 r to fiJ .~w-iCi .:virr n i .:v 0 Ci= zc,- .
:-ettea vc-•Y?,d off oet auch a reaction .

.., . .. .. ..` . ..~ a~. . .
. ... ...... .. .....•
..+t-~ . ?r ,i
.. . . ~_ . . . 1 . --~..C :2T .) l1
.~T ,.., ..V
r~C .. ::: :± r;=~= :=!3 3~
F.Y' . . of U:o r.iSph.,^.t_e L-yd.-oc:..M:~ora ort :-:cted .^rcm tol-occco CSvea
an t.'-.raceno, p7rer.o, 3,4-bonaFyran e a :d 1#lWconrr-yr oao . :^ oaaorvatic na
38
wero =do IC-7 :•:r ir.l-.t ar.3 ry:•.c3er (I15) vit': : ccr.ect . to arn aiir!::tic h~Cromrlcr.o
cixture (90 pcrcont of vh4ch vas pxeat :.a,i.7 l:entriacontaao, a-C31H~) ot,tui .^. : d
b7 tbo extraction of tob~icco . Pyrol3rois of tbia wi :tture in an os~-ca-freo
at~ocFhcre ;iolc3od r~nt~.rscor.o# pyrene~ fluorant2:enes cr.ryaona and 3,4-bor.c;yroro
in the pqrolssato .
In 11~42, roi'fo (94) ncted thct t2 :e extrrciior: of tobacco with o••ch orEc..z io
L. ...-
.i\Y.'r~tt~
J ~~ ..n{•~'1~
.. . . . .-, .. . .i Y':.` . . .. .,
:. f rr^.
. tv :•.:9+j, e^' . ~
:C . ~ .. . ,
ro :.-a.lted i.^m a ro:^w' :cn of t,ho cr.rri.ôCcnio ccti•rity of '.ho t.s ott,,:'•:od ty
c°.catr :otive diotil2ation oY' : the oxttMsctod tot;.cco ao cc ;_p~-r cd vith the tar
ottained ty t} :o destz-uotive diati2l .ation of Uh:o nonoxtractod tot.ccco . Roffo
cu~. Featcd that the cxtraction would removo t ::3 FY;7tostcr oia, a nor : =1 con: 'i-
•. . ^,~ :;ccc. ^c w^. ~O C : .,» ..«< » ::9.53Q
._en.,0 . ~ r t .,.~r,.rCC ;. ,t
- 0 .7 o~ .~'+,..v^Y`4~ 4buEOd
.~;'t.o
on dry ueiCht r.u co .r.rxred Vith other ph,.nts, e .g., Fotsto, 0 .15 For contj
csbtaL-ev 0 .12 parcent ; oats, 0 .20 pcreent ; sqti;ach, 0 .16 pcr cent .
:. = c:M•. x a u V. .V rs r :.vo dcr.c ::J t.a

r :. ted t.',.:..•t the p7rolysia of ctcrola or sterol
e : tors, e .F., ch olc ;,tercl, 7n1II, R" = Ii . or choleoteryl paL-!t a to,

~'2 ; ,•,.~,^. ., in t,Y :o °cr- ... .•C^ of polyCyc? :c c: ~;.tic
( 39, 1G7 )I o : g ., c~-;•soao and 3'~othylc~clopcntonophonsnth.Mc:.e, :VIiI, of ~ :h'_c.h_ch
a t Icaat one, clx •, ccô, is carcino ~_? auic ( E, 9, I^, 17, "' , I.:, 103, 105) . I.o
.yM~la! t~ . .
o r,.... ...'
._,r_....J .. w n .. • . 1
.. 1- ~e . .7 ...,.+ 3 t .+r.ti- G`.~
.s rv e •., •1 .~ ^V ..w-rf il ..
.....,._r .. of c ddn'~J
.= _„iormV 1
e M-
•-
rti ~
e?c13c nc=c«,:.tie ccw ;.ounds, severa3 o: which are earciacgonio and ti•hich woL
cp, ;e:.r in the noutr :.l fraction of toL•:cco =ace, e .g., c}oiestMd_enc-3,5, X717,
(39, 105), cl:olcsteacno-4, XX (390 107), dickolestoryl ether, XXI (39), cr .oles-
tai:o, XXII (3~), and coF.rostame, XXIII (39) . Cbolootadieno-3,5 (107, 109) and
c::ol.a3tenoMe-L (16) are carei .^,oCeaie . In Ceneral, the prytootaroln differ
2: on choloctcrol in t;:e otructure of tho side chain at C17•
Y7II XvZiI X :t
:. -`G\/-
XZ XXI XXII
x = -..'n(Cx)3•( % )3•ca(ctg)2 in
fo= :2ao XVII, XLt, XX, XT.I, 17CII
zzd
.1./1i.~~ . . .
•f.~1 J.
Co:s:4crst:cn ef tn i3 cata cc ::car^.:^g t.':o stcrols ar.d 11-h o cLi,',.w;,ic byd ro-
e:.r lm r.a aiu- rcst3 tha t tt o Frec•: -aor theor~ of eiga.rotte 3Cc6o C017C j C . C
i3 a loCical =e . At ;,resEn ts tt:e i3
to:r.g isvost :C•sted in thin 1abcratcr7 (81) .
With raaFcct to 2 . atove, °e :.r.::ay (55, 56p 57) and Yo :ma•.m- .1 and Ear.:3on
(5C-) deccn3tratyd thzt the p7ro?yaia of cuch or ;au! o =teri; 3s as
;rcact ( :b), crol:atcrrl (56, 58), c^.a7. (56) 57), ;etr ol~.r ( 5 :,)
~ i ip acet~ :.cno (56, 57 .1 . 81:d i.".o~`mo (55) at te--peratu: as ra :.Ci: C f: = iGC°
to 92C° C . (s to that ottsSr.od in t.o L=a ;:g cjC:.-ottca (3~, L9)) b=e
tr.rs vr_c!: vcro carci:o :erlc to r.curo sz_r. . T'hese tsrs ocn+„a•.r.cc a t~.iph ccr.-
ccat .-r.tion of pol7cyclio r.rro=t:c hydroc: rbor.a .
lir± ]rar accrcr :.•ao :ts r.rse toon carricd ou t t7 othor i .:t oc ti rntcrs vi!, :
recroct to hc .:ted f;c:ct•,;.^ :a, vUch aro ~•:.::ci~.r.lly ~,
a: .. .~c ra,,~^
..r_..ls, e .g.,
ta:cted t`cad (1^6), ror.stod coffee (76, S5, £t3), toa r90)~ fat3 (62, F7, 93i,
re,:to {iC4, 113) i a .^.d gr~in (69) . A ror e dctriled descriptioa of these
exror±=oat3 ~s boon Froaeat~ ~rev!oi :s~,,^ (S0) . In rcst in,tc.nces, ~ :~ci~c~~u^±c
tars voro ottai :cd b7 bcatina t : o!ccdot.:: f .
Far:-.LC,7 ( ;7) ot..er: Ed t_...t a Y twa ta ...,.c.•a V W e at ~ .h.c

.m oco=•rod, tho carcinoeonic uctivity of tho rcsulting tar also tc a- e aj, ^ .cront.
TMo g"eater tho te=Ceraturo of r,,•rol~-sis, tho groater the : ro.;.3ti : at.ica aad
caroinoeonic acti :vity over the te .-.Feratura ran€e 450 to 850° C .
It io possible that such a =ecb :r.i= is oporative in tt :o casa of tho L~ Ln

i:.g of totacco di:rir.g t.~o nor:.-sl rmolking r.roceca . In order to ryd ;:oo t!:3 ~
J
ccntent of .: e po1yt-Icae ara..~.:t :o tqdroca rtors in the sro :.-e, tho tc :'per zt ;w a ~
m
of ccrbu3tn cn e2xuad oi whcr ta lcs~orcd tolcv 5CC' C . er raisod a y;, : a 9r'C° C . Ln
:~j t2:e addition of sti :aa"1o re : Cewts . ':hin apr,roach vi11 ta wvactiumt3d in m
this laloratory in the tuture . w
Ln
a . . ,. . . ,,. .~ t .
b *- 3 MV . . s A~•
V.
t'. cc ..t i ., t.1 .Q ;-Wdu + i ci: of

o a. W c w.ti C C M.r • •~ Ma . . c- V t~ C ~. K.. . .v . .. . .. .r «i l :ei .ir
kn cvn (77) . th 0 j1Qrr.^ rvu-atio r:~•o-!

. .al,
, 'on bcati.~a with oit.ew . .e••:1Pti
. ...- or. .•~ole .._
w~ =
Ga to &-C° ~, C~ 7Q9 :. .^. ' ~C C• . . .. - :r A ~"',jC: CLC .^. C :' } . . .: ='-~'II _
`~~ ~ ., .
' ( .^ ~j ~^ ~ . . ~} w .. . . ..J ..n~•~ ~~~ ~ ~ - yw1
.• •Crj .~ .C+V~_1Q, ~~ ly ` .~J V~F.1 ~.CbVM ./W•. .r{•y xr--iY t~V .icc .7 : at ,v ..• ./Vy
to,z,:ccos does conta=.n froo sn1R,, .•w on tho lsaf (7) . Presi=bly t::o :r ce oulftr
r.: :ces e3 a eontar11r_:r.t durinv t .*.a arMi:b of txo tobacco vith certaia ouL L-~ .
containing Snaocticidos .
40
•
zxpcr'_s.enta v111 ho ccr--:uctod at acme tir.o in tho Putin•e to dotor ri.~.o the
offoct of tho suL^.:- content of tobacco on the pol7c; clic arc:.,at:.c,h9droca- --•: on
contont of the =ok,e oonde=to .
;be !ol i cyc~± c cr^nativ h„^-drccartoa ...c, scc .-:ri a.:t:rM^..-

oaro, phenanth-rene, ryrer.o, 3-rcth7l ;.qrcr.o, fluor :.ntr.ono, 1,2-tonzantlzracone,
3,4-`.oncp; rcae, 1, i : -tenzeFer; leno and znt!'-.cnthrene hrvo been identif iod as
co: •':it•,:ohts of tho szoko cor-,4cnsato troc V2SL blend ciCa : ettos .
It has boon Qut,,;ested that :ho contont of the pol7cyrlic aror.stio t7dro-
ca.Mbcr«3 in the siroko condensatA w,;.y te reducod t .y cno of the Pollcsdng uathodso
1. ^ e :•e..-vval of sFeci .ic precursors :rcm the tobacco .
2. "as ad'iti:.n of cc~.in acr*rcunrs to t .':e tobacco vr.ica wiil

either reduce below $Cd° C . or elevate ahovo 900° C . tho
c't~: .: :• :cn a.AtLj.i3r4'L'Sre of tC ba cco .
0:e renoval of free sulf'ur from the surfaco of tr.e tobacco . •
',.It ia rocc=urr_'ed t :ât invooti .:tion3 on the re4uction of tho content of

t. ;.O~ ~:~dT:C:S" .C~3 in SS c .~ : ."9t t O E:..^.Sfl :A
Aa out +êd F .-cviously, such an invostiCaticn would involve one or wora

of the following proceduros1
l. ".ho recovar of cpecifio precursar3 L7 r.,ot2:ods such aa

ext.-.ction of the tot.:.cco with a sui•,ablo solvent, o . Cpi
pentan o, diethyl et .her, ota. ( T: is ir.7catigation has
been cor;~letod L-i the csao of the rsntano E4tracticn of
C' ~'r :. ~ :.on: to :.~cco (~1) vi t: S4: or:. ; le result3 . )
2. ".',,;e i--.êotiLat.cn o :t s ;at : 1-'o aCCiLives uh{ch vill alter

tr.n =h•st_cn tc r~rst•~•o of `:aL tlo n: tobacco vithoU4.
u.x ;ua e : f ect on tho f:.+vcr of tho
3. :%e irve~ti~at- :n of the of°ect o .° cc:,-plete rc=ovn]l o:'

t.oa of
o=ok.o ccr.dcnsato .
1.
•,a tacco on t.s .. c~it
c ....W~ .. . the
•
. v ~ .~ 4- t.o = onCBo
I'cc .^. w«. z L«O s NC. .1C L .^.CJcco t'r','r'c .'1, e .~ . ~ flu^r-cL."• .^• ..l
ttal.oy, :'1r 3ciah, etc ., Le incostintcd with rsoFoct to the Fo2,yc4-cLo r .ror: ~:.c
41
h;drccar, to n cc^tcat of t .",ci: c :.,bo to dete :-.- :.:.e wh_ch toc.:cco tJro, iP a .^.y, in
C' ?•+ L bler.d tobacco Ss tho Frir.oiral offe : •dor • :his gr aject viil a23o sorve to
r.r.ticipate tò resi:l.t: of ox-por :.-snra vhich aro teina cor.duted b.-, .t4'yr.dor (116)
an the c:roinogenic activity of tbo =oke condcn .ato from ciiarottca fahr ic .ztod
from tt:e individ=l tobacco tyFes aoatiomod ebooo . "
,F,rl,.r Y
vcrk in th:a labc;•atc7 vi11 acn.^.ist cf the 3avcct3~'icn of tho
~e arccifio ccnyo .dc in tot :cco vhi•ch rsb procur3ora of

the pc7;, cy ciic arozatio .hydrocarbons in the ctmoke ccac:easata
(aoe (81)) .
2• :•e addi trvoa required for the altorr.ticn of t: o cc::;;,:s tioa

ter.; cratura o .° C`+'ZL blend tot.:cco .
The ±n:'2uonco of tMo free sulfur contont of tobacco cn the

pol,ycyclio aromtic hydroca.Mbon coLteat of the s : oke .
4• Tho polycyolio a:•cr.at3o hyr:rocarhon content of tho s :cYo

eo- :dennate frcc eiC--rettea :ah: ieatcd frcn different tot,:eco
.. ~t . • .J ~ . • . ~
t j ~C'J, e+ ..,~
. ..I'si .y . . s @ .... - ti . .~.3{: ^ .
r "C~G . .}.
is aov in progress in the caao of tr.e fluo-cured to*acco .)
:°Y:e ir.fl•,ier.co of C-iR on tho Folycyclio arc=tio hydrocarbon

ccnter.t of t.ho --oke cordenonto lrom WZN: TCa c3.Carottes•
project s nov Sn proEreas . )
:.n 1 . and 3 . t~r:ec» ::ecc.:-ar, .âticrs, th3 r=câl cf c ;~,eci=ic

Fr ccurscra ar.3/or si:lf= Ly solvont oxt~~actSon of tobacco ri,g» : bo a Fa tenta :.le
;mccd=e• . ;nveatigctions o::, the aolvont ori..-acticn of C• tC-L bler.d tobacco ravo
been cc©pleted vith favarable rOYulta and vill be reported in tt•.e r.eas
(F1) .
~.~.~..
' c
A1.1n FxCo .:Zl i
Xr . r . F:oovsr
. .,, :, . ._ .. : . ..a
~ .•
~ •XLir:ay
Dr. Alan °odZ=r.n
L^ : .^ s7 ( 2 ~.
1>SG
T'.,~ds £eptczber. <S, 1950
FroW r.zr.tscr #tt jb ~,
lp;rcredt IL%~VLC,~~u/ : ~
-J
r_r,~ ."~- .: ;-^y
-
i• A flo nymou$ , CalK!±noCf!'.".Z in C, i'i! - Rlt t o /': ri? -• Mu 1• i'fi.Y• J• 9 12L/v i ...y -
1••G,jj((•rr
• '
Ai1o~ •r'1 ."'.ALTl~,.rr~rr•r.

C3~rCtfO P,~.C^T SITlf~
ri..~.~.~r._,~r.~~ - .
F` • ~ L3`0
(1954) .
'~ !^ f+I ..n . .r;i1~• . .C A•i!.+a' L~ LI M4I
)
.'.w. .+ . ..w .. , Aw {!-
l~. .wwtw f.CT ~ .~
. .+ V .r . .
~'.~ . i
Ar.o^,7rous, C' .-r"•te ^rtr„r_`;' =8«c~norc~ns . TCE;CrC (D• C• ) i Mp LU
(195L ) .
!noruroi:a, Frcc+•_cration ^4' Zblacco :ar. rC:r-M . EM . REWS, Z1,, ??,42

(1956)•
Ano-mccts, `'r^vinp ^~-•~ .:••~+uro rn+_3o to AffAct Clhf~-ic:is . .CI . TO' ;
60 232
, ôt ::cco . R. J .
•~n . ~ . . . ., _ .. . , . . r•-• - . ..
. ~ ` .
s• Pi.Cti'W'.'l^.a, W• '•s CGo~L, J• W . 9 T..^.71al! e~ . , G~e kC2"'9, C• C . ~~., N~ :f1eL10 .

G. :'evettv C . I»0aad Robirsca. A• 2f• . ~•''~,~,__ :::__ ,• .
tv F+ . F Jc?rcc~r*~+r~ . IV . P}ICC . °CY . SCC . { LC::B~~1) ~ ;s 343-3uC
(1937) .
9. ::.:':"7 , G ., a -4 Caoy, J. Li, 9 S(' ...- . . ..1`±,^C*1 r f f't " ~ct l 0 .^. 4r .°C"'r3 Fo? :=
t .~ ^~n .a . ..d . ~ ".3 1.
.~' Z: C.'7Q A f 1 x .. .. .~~.+
r~
.1•
I0• D..rry, G ., Cook, J, W. 9 ?oclevocd, G . A . . D . 9 F.evott, C• D• p F.iej:er, L,

aP.L Y.C^.-aUGy! r.• Tn~ Irrcluctlc'1 rf C'.nC •1" tvcUr 'FYdr"a :'2'cr9 . ?T7 .
FRC:• Rt,T . £CC . 31C-351 (1935)•
11. Loreab :=, I. , Jr
"}~. r."c~-rc{^^re~ic
. ra
r, o~ .roP ~, rtcn
0 rt 1 M o .r
pc~ ~ . Ca1'Cr~
44-43 (1:1,.1) .
.. .~_ .r . .1 . . . ~a . . .a .r _n a~.~, PI ... ...J .71
~r . . .. . . . . . ..~ .....! _ .I
c1
~ 607
1 ! ~~~ . ..~r . . .~.:~~..~.. . ......~.i.r....

/~
~ 1147
:r•
7:. Ior-a r.wi•.~, . ., a:.d =^'o cr ,rrr,ton î2

a!'1 .. ..~~
•
:...Jr,iiw~
. ~.. . Aa A
of „c=n+s F :• :n . .1 .V ;::'Cr.?, =I$ 379-3S2 (-9L?)•
51710 5038
43
4 ~d)
. s.
15. ZO:•BZl b lw, I ., and P . ~! t-. ..~ ~ . . . .1 . a . ~t ~.A t ..-.,. .. . _
c _ .. .•.. ..
; ..av of Crret ...r n " 41 ft t .Q, •' • J.
C f NCEIR , 30~-39 1947 .
16. slachoP!', F., and F.up, J. d., 7et., ~:ry.g~inn~of~a C.:rc~~ ~n±c A_ t
4n thA ^nrr;:ar+,io~ e£ C!:Îoetnr^1 to Prorectoror.e..e C' ~JCF.•3 F. .F.ai.C~i,
.C~i ,ai
6 y 4C'3-4G'9 (1946) .
27. i c t to .^1C^,l, A . C. , and Ncrt, -C. C . # 7%l ~., .. .. v ~ ..,..,... ..a_ :. °.._° , .~
M =":_~
er.r? nlete he!c?• AM . J . C't'C-11.?, ?;?, 'TF1-WG (1934) .
18 . L•res2ov, Z., Aoac3,S.n, L., P.aar.useen, 0 ,, •«.3 lta'.=~

, A• 7 •,
.
rrC•J^~•{Of3
. . . . . .1 r . . : , .~. . .
nÂ ~t . . .. ..~ .~q r . ..• .~ .. .R ^ . .w1 ...4 •n t . .. ^ . .nr.pw
~. .~ : ~ . ' •
t,• V . ~ V r .~ ...V j ..~ : r . . .'
. ~
jj~t
COOl~~p~.
19• Ca~•+:xsll J . A• !and"r 1 R• I. , a r-r.~er:Gr.
'^:o~ i '.Z
: . .~.i~r~...
yit~ e Fiyfi ?^Ci~c^G~~:
~r. rr.~S•~.r
of Cr.^.er.r,
'rr
.•'~~ I ::D.,
.
. ~ ..~ r r .
20. F., a!" AlVOTd , B. T. o

.t
! M
r:_r.er_ ' r« . ~ ,reoc: rresaated st c :
+' a . of~~ ~
: C1 ~8 :.C0p 1.. ..+zTiL..,
,°.,,^... . .3 .. .7L' . .: ~ C .. .02' f:.9 ~aP:. :.Cfa:LCSlt C$ . ,
:.bc . -6-•3i, 1955 . Abstr . in : 0iF.•1. E::G . .'.E+3, 14, 225 (1956) ; 'CI .
L:1 ^ r?, l9, 4 (1956) .
21 . "c :r_ i .^.s, P. T., Coo,rer, R . 1.., ri^'a L.Â8e7, R . J.,

.ccrl,r-r, r3 :1TCt•tA w'+ o!n • `R i : • J• , IS. 2~jCr3 0 L ( .L9 r!• ) . .
, 22 . J• •1•, Pr^ .~r^+t .. .. r.f C:.•'• . .. ..

: t ~... ~. . .!• ! .7 .iw Cnw:. .+ .. .~• P~1^
~i . N•
::Cv" . C : `•^l:.A C.'.IiCIEM V( :~.~~'TD1, ~a 373-3 0 (1933 ) .
23• C L'OL, J• Wpt flk or3 g`'T'7 I :!;d :?

.o l:-ri ^_a Z p:"o^^rtio m Of th: e " rR l ;^.C^^': :O
^
s lai t .^.21et^!? • ~:~ :GL .~i • r • v1 J : ::Ii, . - u• li*~. .r.: ". .vF ~..: :. CK3 ., ~ i.i -+c.SJ (1, 139) .
24. Cooror, R. L., ::ret%r oP ±hs L :,^- iFAlrt!n o oTaGGo . ~Zi. ~.'rI?-^.
Ca :,C~ C+?~PA ICRi A~^ :.
25 . Coc-cr, a• l» p
13:4••i .'65.
CiC.Ci, pert :~• lw, ~'i ~. .~

:~
. a'' r nn
a. . ~+ l=" T, :~o, 573-579 t 1~j ;4 3 .
-cc-» r, =. . ..• . ~ , v 't•tcrt,
~ . A . ..
and U=~re,;;,
,~re " . ,i .,
-
w:^•~ro tn Ci~«nttA ~~c•~s •e Car.tr~r!_ut±o_tLc± t! :o mrr.r. E:.I : . J•
,~... . ,. . ....~?f ?, ,~~ 5 (1955) .
. • .
23. ~ .
- . .~
.. .
o 7 •l .. .i . .w
and
M .w. r...w., .. .VJ
L rai . .
c a
.N
.. ••~T rs • 117i-,1-MR .
51710 5039
( Ccnt' d)
29 . Ccop@1', Re L. j w,.d Und .^.cy , ~~C• , - '- -
: .«r~ .
•~:.i, V
., cr*cl! c
30. Coo;r.er, R . L ., and Lir.dcey, A ..^J., 1 .1 .."+~~,~rr~•~ro '+r :'. e!!'Par rfl f] ~
:r ..+n .4- .. /!f .. ..«nfa -~ r«^~ .1 . {•i+•'~vt~it ~ 3~.~i-3C9 / 1~.75J) .
~'e+f~rnf~^ .r7 . rnSi .
.. . " ~' "1 ~ r ..,. ..~„ ro

.'~ ► 0;' 1 . u . , ~ :. . d . , .~ " 214m
i. . L~ . and 0
.
~nn, .Mr+r+wr~ ~ . ~rRr`~rf ~aC ~• .r+4= . Ct «a~: . ~. .v~ .:.r .~ ~C~ 1 :+
d TCt,my , G . rpoo . pr C. coT1Ll.' d t o

3 ~ . r.!@J~ ~ • aw~ .' 17 . ~^ *~~~irwwn~~
, _r"•o;lr.o3.d-1 io~,.cco Ccw~.~, Wited b7

the ? eoGarch reP. .rt4cnt, lR. J.
cdA ., 1' . 1 :ar . R. .i . P.c?noids roaearca I11= .::7 i=F:'.let
,~ ., ~o v
f, .
3~ . uSCze~ , v. P . . I1' i•T te cO2TW' u 1cJt :^vn . ~~' :'~ ~, .7
.^'~~ ~^r^• ^
LV . +d
ro~ , n ot _ ,. ~ . .l~r,C~1 ~~
~. 7 tn4c' s-b iy!T= ' `
f..~:~!/!t~r . ^r ;'^'='"
. . ~~
1 ►Cii~ r,
. .Vr . .
-50 (1955) .
f ~ I`+• . . ..~^ ..!.aO p
.l . . .7
of.J ~,i~ if..9 :a1~If'4'•
/7• :
. . p a ::v K . L:
t~.~ •~ ~.rr.a•T .... .T~
. . 2 ..:--~-
• :.~'..; ~ • lF : ~ 1+~.%.~.. .
.~ rs~
0
36. ôll R . ar.d F. . A . L . T+cc•a~ !n "el~•ticn t o
~. ~'-~T~nn
..~.~ ..:~~ rnr~i:~t =r l~~
'
;+wi 2"p R E`.TO'.'~ . Lgl To t`.R
.'.L . i.# ~~ (Z )$
~ t^ ~• t
.1 . ..-...~5
. a !S+Arn ,+en»
. { and :'c l-_-a rl, D . ~ ; ^ --
w. s't!rRl y' "~!LI!~ p L'C1
37 . ^Z'L :C :.:-8?, ..~F.~. -
t~ w ;~~r
•r~ r P
`1-360
~
~9 (1955) . •
iLA ~wC nnr,.,qwai7 .-n~ `
► n ~P~•~nn~ .~
is . •?. , ~.nd l .ol.î ti
..~ R
~
lw
. rw
..: • -- -
.., ..A n;.r; -/ 94lr~~~) •
• .~ .i•;vri
s.. t ~ 1~9Cw'4 \
39. ~Ci ~ ., o.r.cl :toinor,~ P.

F . L., Co :y° --- = ^:
~ . , ••.~^'3
~.~.~~
,' ^s t~C nt 4 nr, , o C; . Qm "l'f 3" ,r.rZSLtc!!t +0
b33-l.4.? (1949 ) .
40. :3cscr, L. F.r

. 2nd : cition, p . ,'41.,
~• , •• • w ~ • .•^~ . fy r .rt+~l ~Q/
: :Cti :`n . ~ . J J . C . r Ci,t . .. . .C 1+E~
41 . ocel ~• A . and `•i C"1r.7 ~ . p V .L4~wS vifl~t rr P+Cti Ci

•,r..
Cc=;ci~:d3,' Cui~ve 195, Nev~Yor?t, No ? . s J. 'A' :lsr/ and Scra, Ir.c. , 1>5+.
w { ~,., n ~„w. ~; r4A
C" 21 . .i. .v ., vw is /GG .
tJ1
L~/ • • ..~ .w . , V W . 8 hI / • ~
~ .1
.G:. . Tu+3 . , CL..-vo 472.
1r6 . T. .' :#m . p r ..""~0 1+ W .

45
~i w '*7 ~ 1~Zt. I C:)
47. IbiB. , Cr."Vo 55L .
lw°. Ibid ., Curvo 567.
49 . Ihid., Curvo 569 .

r, "^^..,
,,, ., • lm p uo LT`:S'.T., . C ., ~~`^r awthw+L.nwr~n~++ .pntn,
b
50 . Cr .~..^ , C. VC3
~ .. .
., 5 «,.,
(2 . •)
+ .
51. Ccw. .{ w ....a . .wn ^'

t O. p
r .".(3,.~..~. 'S
0 .. m ^Ci~a31 .
ur:Tr}..~..
ir
o i~n Gif:A.
.r...~ .iri~_
:A. f
(hi5:) .
A
53. Psart.reL, J. L ., ^''nzwoy of Cc~oi :ndn '.;hich Pavo Econ ôstcd for
~ w .~r+ 4 i :.LJ," 2.wd ai:,+
/~ + .A+wA .. .. w
A
N .~ Y.- . . V' ;~ ~r .4.r1. . . .~C. ::~ ..~a~..ti:C., . .~...., ~~.:.
V r• ~
.e
['.Ca1ia:
Ca1ia: : QC Y -~VGi , 1~i 5 1 •
.. . . ci r••,
. . . ,' 7
55. Z. L. p :,jo 7, .^. .r^-~.tion
.. cf C:;
:r rur `z ..w,.c h• ...r
P? :i'. ..~ . .,"
. ~'C : .~ , ., ~33-,,~~0 (1'>~G) . -
56. :.O ::r.::. =7, :.• iA , ''Yrnnji-

^
A
ow
nl n ~ FTM :~.~
.~~.~.. . ;..._:
..~.. : . .Lr~•.~.~r.. : ::I ~: .
~ 2~D . J., '~~ . ( .~), 1•L . .
57• iref:Sy :wy, :.• 1..,
~~r, t ! / . .. .r .
Ir•~
58 . (1c {V .G.:.Mf, 7 . MA' and \ W. .i V o Y, Y , n:Z =

i l w ~~' f rld :/1 Arj C,^~w, ~~
*'*1 F•R'O~Q^~9L3 F!`?'~t1s1` ~~. ~. .! .~~i.̀^.~~')li . .7 . : r~'l~i . «•iai ; .! ~~ .
607-632 (11028) .
.nwI~t ..y Oi~
59 . rc :t.^.kv .1 . : ., `wineP:rt, J . v ., !'.5. ."~ ~'abEr, D ., St-e~(~?
• ~ «~:~.. .~ ~
~.. ..A .. •'ww(~(1= .7rf . .C . ~.'+ 1A
o t l ~~w t r uL b.j.0
.i+.'i {r :: T• :r.• _-1 I,QQ b ; .:C of {.~`:e fLL . .i : i bMY C : --i eaa f Oc i Y ty , C1 n C Ln«.ati ,
60• lCw1~JCey.'
,.- . .. ~/
:-• ' ww
d V LL.wr
!~w .
: :^7 ..e1 2' .~.{M~'.1• 's I
C?~ R•. .ri li+ CT C ~~!
02:5:-<60 (1953) .
~~ ~~ ., I~ ~',1 "~,
V. . . ~r..i. J r~J ..^C!AqN!1
.wL ..
:7 .i :',= .^.=~ * .•,. : ~C .
~ .~
,F-~
-1
FCT-4 Y , .. Z i-+
62 . L::.e . D., a .^d Sv!, A . C ., '"r^

:+{''^
- - . (~ii. . .Ci ..: , ~
~ 1~.
W+~wiv j~
all
?=T--L?rG^`"'Kt (Ccr.tld)
T r .. .twC'
r rna+.e
63 . . .~i1 ~«•~ . • D ~• r-
C :..~l
Nr raZ .• .,t.n
. , Cnrt
, •"~«~n/f
t- t~ : :a.a~l
'~ w+
prt.zo ` ~a :~At
.a.Cd wC~t
~~
. e .
:',;et!.^.g of . the ~tir.ericaa Ct:ez.3ca1 : ociotyt- r-ir`w' .~Cj•~s Cct
21, 1954 . • -
.;1i / . T'/.•.tC. . .'.-r•r ~;~iL~'~ .'l>.
~~ r .`~^ Mwr1 T~!. ." ^n aJe.rt D~• /N'tr
l.+:a ., ... .. .. . .+ .r. :~ ./ .I ~ . • ~ J
t . ,~~ .S . .. t . . . . . . . • .« i
t'i• t -^n{ .n l 4 CO1

..
....N 14% .a^ n . (G), ?.? :-~.13 t17 :G)•
U V• :: : :• l. G ~.~d : vC' j:, . .i p a :.`~

.. r.E'ri"rilrt~~ . o
.t,~ t,ri"l~ t,
.. ..+ .{ ~_. . /, ~r«"tn± AM • : .'D • a .r. : 336-332

.. . ... .~~-.~
.^~ tces," L~rc~ce•^..,,rc~e•

67 . Licki:ti ='•,''tt•t olorie W- ;! 'r crIn;1.a:2o des L ;:r.eera
^ .• ..w -4 . . . : te ~.
~^:rcr•f, 1?53 .
C' :. ..
...G.t .rl •r ..p I` . . ...ai~.
..
' . /e.rn tn., .rt .,{t~r .t Of ~O~'*f:CD r
:~• Ni, . .n . . . . • .. `
. . . ; • . . t
• rFV - n~J . .
~ . .+ . .d . . . . ..~~ n~~.. w: .L.V :,~'. . i C
.~ivc ..r2~~ {~ir
19 55 . nt3~. . .•n: 6 9
r ::a;rt.~l cr.~s3 t a , a3 n. • «r r •w ~ {
uZ~'•a! " Fn~
^ (1 55 ~
• ti.rnwlwn'1f11 C~r".f~ttniit.^ CP n, .'.C=~n t'' ^,~«9

69 `~• l t?.S`.d KU C• n
~ O.
.f•~i~fLl•~ ;i~ .trt!!n n T' ~:fX?^ . ^t'. (i• :~ CC• : Ya : : ., rI.'L .
_
~ ^ ,.
:(1942)•
5 .44 ~
Ci . . . .Nn .!n r ..C t :C'• m 63

t•-
y Ct q37. y (1 .0) • 91
Jc :c3, , .. .
71 .~
:''cr.. C •~r:o.1,
~ ^
^ . .,^
. art:
P:. . ~ .
Go:cc :,C , t ..n
. . .•.{,^
• 'nw L.wnl 'Iw •1+A = t SD Ie;^7 D~ C',rA ; ^~ .'1 of + 1 jnl' . .V .:
_
.
¢ ...r. ;.l .. .. i7 .-• . ; ,+D C^!~ C~'?CP^1 rJ=
7 2 . ~ , IllsA
C• ., 'aAd zcrtor, :'~• Cf . p ` ~ - ,~. .
t
73%• ~ ~Z .5Q) .
f '` e te,.. 11 .`. : . ._ t .'. ..;
:,~~
t~ A '.11 L'
. .r - .__ t rr.d rAe
.~Iw•• r~> • C• ~ \
73 . . .~ :•
'/Crtw"•1 :•Ctw"1 {
n
I7)
.7r• !7, :: :i r :Ca .'4a:•,
i4•
.-?, 57,"5 {1033')) .

^ .; .. ~ ~w
1.• L . --
I S• . . . . ., ~. ..G •r. ~. , • t . .^ n.
_,+Mci'L^~~,«^ê• J . A :'. .
n6, '~C .
'_sIAI~ 7•2- .•
..wA !:1n~•i .. . . .w
.w . .{Jt~ .•a11w. •• :l•r.w{ . .. .~ .•
~AF!.!i'mwr!!fnett{l
77. . : :,'i
~i
..sw
. t. . . P. /~ ., . '~ {.. . yr, ~t .. .. I `
t- Il..• ~ Cra t. ;'c~ . C
+T .~
..J OS
.~ VV
C'
.~M•V
~. :~ahli~ ;.e:~, 1948 .

Che .~~t:~J," 3 :o~r York, '7. Y .~ I~tzrccic~cc
IMV .,
47
-T"iTCG'nFrT (Cont'd)
.,~. . . .
.. .. . . ....^ .~w,., ..
78 . 3C5-313 .n
k :9 :4 .
79. P.odg=a, Ag g Zhia P.eportt RB:?, "36p No . 9.

80. °ode=, A . # Poodatu£fs . Spccial P.eporto 1156 ~
~ov. 19.
Gr . ''Oa :..ir A• ~~'~ snnlwnle~ nr ~, • r " -wAtt$ T 7 • q''! 'fj

of •ri :'I'i. C 3 n'n d ' ?V` a 1c n o • FDi7y :'.(j sc Jiti.i . . :opo : *
i. to bo .
tjd .Y
82. fiof°o, A . 'R•..q ; 1 a rtz?~io !'o",3c _ j,!„_nc,. ECL. I'JC: . :~ . EtP.

~_...r, . .,~ ., ]~ .C
•, ,,,i, ,
.~~ , . ',',
, rn.~ . . . :13
. .:t~ ;~r a. DL'T:. .~!'.•
. •!'
L3 • r.of:o1 A . rS . 1 i
A~-
.~i.~i.. . :r ..~i
1269•=71 (1937)0
...,,,3
Pof :o, AA lcs 111nLi!r^.r .n :) ,: 3vnrcf,a 7r
8 3• AoPfo1 A• r .1 rr-- c,off eseg• -1 CL . I` : ' T• .'TU . ~ .~ .

. . ~ _I1I_w ~ ..Lr.. .~ n , f
.. : . .rY . C . . .wY. .~ ~ ll.Yll~ . ~~%i7/j v ..~ ..•~ . . . .. . . . .1 2L/!
86. ôtfol A. A . q e a llcer r.P Z :?o -c?Rl s I,;1,i±m .; co1

ECL . 7McT . M- . .ir{P . ::::TuT . C .% ::CLRI I§s 1-38, (1939) .
8'7 . Rotfol A . F . , ;~~1{ "i-R;+r,P.n ~?^4 ` 3ch ru±•t~rt:nv, rit

~ ~F,itrnrr.-.?iorton rotten, L•ULL . AC: CC . 'r?1! tX . L• TLDr-. CP% ;:C-'l'R1 ;, a~ 55u
(19~9) .
: ~nrPo ~ :. ~q~.f!Jwpr .,~ . .f .. ^ :=^ .q R~ lw?• Lf' :~• /~
G7K . L~ .. , s .
! 1
~ 1322-13Ed (1939 ) s 91,19? (1939 ) .
V7 . rr.^t!1 -at ;J 'np1,j,,,lrt Z.

fiP. "'FGP.: CR ., ~ 5~~-5y7 (1y39) .
~,^ i~..r .r7 . .! .w? h,..r Tf`!1 .
90 . Roffo, A . 1T .1 C~^w lrArnn+.~ .+ E^L.
,~? "b6lwc)3 (1 ;4C) f CIE ::..y.~AL :,i .p lrj 37C92 (1941) .
9+ . PAf .o~oo~ .1 . :-: .1~• ~ .G+i~ . : . . ._ . lr_~i . . . .-t f'. . ., . . .
^1~3
ltr' r~lny.i.~ ! i . ... .. ..ne . .J . .. ..
._
.~r r1(•~1 .
. .~~
tcrol . L-CL . TNVT . :::~..

,~ 'r:~ :'0 . C,'. ...• C.?f a'- 927-943 (1941) f
A L~ ~~ "^ 8 (1942) .
..t ..w =. l A' (". .. .. .~î ~ .n w ..Z.

92s rof^DI i.
. S: * 1 (..';1'~rY~:;,"',_
~I' L,
;F~., 2133 (191.2) . ~ ~
m
. .•w . .
• . .~i . . • . . ` . . . . .. , .v . . . .~~ ..• :~ ...•
N
G~A I ~~ • .. ~ 1Q/ `
~ I•.7~ 7~ 1~':. 5
.~)j .1 ::.rJ1 .1 ~ +4h (i ;/ n42 ~
aP: io: to 1940, 3,LL•r.on..~ryron.a was !c:ovn as 1 .2.cenztrvrane .

48
PZzLTM.--f .`7PY (Cor.ttd) ,

•
94. ::o::o, .~• It.,
, ^ • JN .~ n ^ 3„n n .y w .'1LwL . .. nA '~ r • ~r1~ - ~ -rt•.•
~ ~~.
:,~~
n ! ~ '' :' 5 . .~ . t_ .`t ) . iu:i.
E:LP•
:L L . .lvri• i .•.'i1CrG ., .~i', •
P•,p .. (1,~j .
. ~1-5VM
.G~jA G~j (~iALX• ALrT.p .f.:,
63355 (19b3) .
95. ~ '~ 1
.3C: •CSd.S~~~• L . n CJ11f .. .
t ~~ ..~~...
4 t A•
C•
s•
w .â
. ... .. C Ql.r
'"..P1rii3
.. T J•
t r tTat R,. n.r+~C
. a 1• r : "•D
C :..
.^t.
- • v . :~. . .L. (.
.•e.n
, . ~ .,_ . . . ~_
~.~ . . .. ..i . ~l ..w ' .w
.. C~ .• .f
. t j ~
•~.~..~ "_. ._wwn~o
p,
~.. .
t~+ -
'= -!
.--
~
1; 37-1252 t1953)•
T .t!+.~P~U_1'~~9~t~~ tF3?!VCrFT~t.n~7 . Z•
96. Z ., .^^w.a. ~ :. . ,
X?Zi;:~AFCR : C:t•, 261..2E9 (19G3) .~
9 7 . rC.^.2Y96, P• p :!i«:cr ,, 1.. 2 °' . :`dq C . . P•

:. . p ..+.^ p Zl.^.(: Dolgo:+ y :.• . # GY:1 .^.
Cs^c^M• CA2.CLR
F.L ~' ;:A rCIi, 10, 49-55 (1950) .
9F• : c:urcb, C•, asd Wlnter3toia, A,,

Lti . .,..~
. . ^ .t 1
.i •..-ri
. Y«~a~
3• 7•r!••P'?Hr',p^•`r^St•~
.+. .. «~ . v . .L . . .~7 ~~ lV - 7~G (1935?•
.Zt.A..A
99• eC^
'.
~I ., a ~p~p :'•tC f-7C a i 9 r :r, . . 7iP ;lP?~i
1C(:. :otal,a, K40 u,"ot::a, i;., aad S:olsti : P ., A ,_:,;.=_.r:ico_, clcr4.cal1-r * .

Wiêd f'rcuo of Tarir•rr^r.ctina rc'ocarci•^.orcniol Arcnw for
101 . `1•,ubik, P. i{n~+ c^ tr+A ~c-6t!rQ P~a~e ih the Star-++a of Ccr~'r .o-
• ~ r... .r..wrr~rr~:rY. - ~
. .n .^. .~
~
.\
c+c r ~G{o
.~
•... .~.~/~ir. V ! C~.1 • ri:n . !i
!:w, . •~
. rn `^ .. ., • C
• • .'.L~
1%-./ (3')/w)•
i C1G.• r`Z ~.. ...;~:•w-.:.:

FtaLôr, P• i. ! i:.l'.r Cii'~~r IA 1! :•,
Z, 242 7-2:4 (1953)•
2030 ::toi n er, P• E ., and Fa2Y, A . L ., ;u R AttcrL er•d Ir. t 11 it3o n. r !'!'acte oF
~'~AC~~
~ . '~r~
~ ''~rC C ••wwlw .. ..~«j~.
t ~.'~
C1••+•K'r•,rn . s.._.._. . .. . •_ --2C=•Ath^lci :ola^.thrrr.©. , : .,C
c^^9-and
RT'=TA ::~"~.. 11, 50-G3 (1951) •
. ' ..'^ . . . .. _ _ :.
Ivl.• =+.Ai.^.L
.L' :, :. Z . v C La C lO o ~'
: .• # a .'. CC» v
«:.Y+ ' r• • •
.,^.t•f`'~lpntmreli 'crnl^< .,~C . ..~ '=tv~
._. . ~.. . . .f . ^ ~ y
~ ~ • . .. :. :. .~...~~'r"Ll ' ••.. ..~ .•. .
• . ... . ., i~~ .•. •
...~ ,,, . .cn cr .:A .-~ Cc,. ... .,~_

1C5. °ti ;or t, J . u•, ar.d ^.,o: t, C• C ., ~ .. ...~..., .~ r ,`+
Y
.~~
V •J ~ ~
i J i. (1939)o
• VC~V~
~V~
.IVV•
:~^_y r
./~ .v~ rVI
C f A ..wnlwn~.A
.. .^lr C .wLrt n nnneJ 1 n ^t'Y -n n
4
.5 .1: ::A ::' 46 • B.`l :•
li s L+1 , 10,28 .
51710 5044
49
(Cor.ted)
107. Vold3t . :a, A., .-

,C~ n l•
1. ~
.r .to
F„r .l Fr . ~ ;y, i'ri :s 1 .1 : 246-247 (1939) .
1C8 . ttc3oink # '-f. Fs o r; voor kt! M. .~l.1^,~r.C, r fC,-%re:~{f~

fnr tro ~c+velc+n~ .+~t oP ~L~r~) . a~..DE~iL i W: a:~itt . ~ G£:.M l K, ~
-,~3732-3747 (1948) .
1 ..9 . ' ;lit8z'=mn,: ;,, ~T^rT'+!'C .^t~ iorz of Ca :~c,l r.c-a •_~ n
}3 .in C i 1 C'. t:C 2 CL':G •~
P j 375•3ES
Z ( 293b) ; aLo ci rcd t7 Voldct.ra,
11. ceo (1C7) .
110. '.'stson, W . 1.9 and Conte, A. J, ;'_,rg_,Mn y -Ayn d Lu^R Car.cor., C.'t7CER,
?j 2G5-249 (19 ;L) .
111 . W;.Loon, :J. L, aad Cccto, A . J., ~ .c~r a: r~;,fr y+rn, AN:, J,
:V~C~t, f4, ~,47«45b (1955) . ,~._- .
312 . :.edCe•.ocd, F,, erc .' Coopcr, R . L,, ;K^n T?~t~ctio~ or,~ rMn ;--i_-~_,_t.ion
of ~ c .d ..^•r_, . .....,..1~:..;•
7 ..w n r
~
in rc?u
wi ., ..r j a1 ~'~ w~ nta a *d
I'I'
! :+aLYCT, Z 17G-173 (1953)•
C4 !1f:C:2' ..^nd Lw
o .P C~U ~ 9~*. .^ .^,fl'.3 i n
Fc2.strd Fc+od, tIA :'':E, " 9 64 (1939) .
114 . '•3r1Fht, G . F .o and `.,lync'er, E . L., C1 .rwrnjto 1`'

- ---- --=;r,
F^~C . A:l . AS;.CC . Ct, .;4M '::,','MF.C:~ip ? (1), 55 (1955) .
115. W: i,,r::t, C . Fp p and 'iyujer, E . L., aù-~+hor Mrric^1 ,°t.•,:.ASna_ e*
. -`t ~.:
r: :v C• A .• j'•:r.~ i . C~•
(2)# 159 (195b)
.der, Z. L ., .26ekyr
Speech proacntod at t}:o ~ym-rooi•.r ca Tot .:cco coruluctcd bj tl:Q
Kot:ropolitan Long Ialand ~-utzoction of tho ft-mrican Croc .ic:1
Scciety, Erookl?n, 9. Y., Feb . 24i =6.
117 . i:qndor, E. L., and Co .i'iold, J,, ..n .+

..~...._. ....n. . L, . t
o P_ ~•~+n
tr _n !~
L1._ ..ic
~ i_..
n~ . .~ .
~~ Y' E'. .'G . J . %'"=D
._. ., 2l...Ps l.41-l+1.L (1,~ ~
• 'i j t:vP. :' , E. L . A rA ~ I' • A , p *rAl" .^.f!f!0 • rr }11• 5 r n a :1 •',1 I n^S ! r !2

, ^
C
..
" L
Cates . J . AIX . ~::.~ . .l: scc ., 32~33b ~(1950) .
119 . „~'
f
.....0 .~w ... L., C ..,...._.,
.,-, 4 .q1w .w
,.. Ap p a.r.d Croni.r:ge
: w
. s .t, i a e.t..l
_.rl•,_tr,r of ^srair.câ v3th_ .Cir_rott., Ta.. . CArjCc'»i
S55-364 (1953)0
i
'T;•LT(C%C'?"rr"'m, . (Co.^.tld)
120, i ?yndor , E. 1.9 B.. A . , ar.fi Cro : ;^ ,,:or, A ., :.w

ndne- .
tZr`r1 A~ ~:^~'C~^f~"'1 ~J{i`tii r ~="':2'rl+t !^. w• i T . Te+Sa,t ,,rr 'w,~
'AL't!'A '~ .. .
. -T::.,
I C t.~r.P.
irs . v. .:.c..r .~Cii,
. 445-~44 : (1955) .
I?1.. Wyr.dor, E . 1.., a Ì« .i vrI' ii ght, Ci. P., iftl~in!~ Af1 * ! "n
Carc ir.^ mm z in Ci r cra ttc Thr. PROC . AM . AC::CC . C:::::.::
•--_-----
(2), 159 (1956) .
1
July 25, 1962
Mr . Kenneth H . Hoover :
August 3, 1962 is the deadline for submission of

abstracts of papers to be presented at the 16th Tobacco Chemists'
Research Conference in Richmond, Virginia, September 26-28, 1962 .
May we please have your approval to present the paper

entitled "The Composition of Cigarette Smoke . XI . Heterocyclic
Nitrogen Compounds from Turkish Tobacco Smoke" by A . Rodgman and
L . C . Cook at this meeting, and may we submit the manuscript to
TOBACCO SCIENCE for publication? If approved, only the abstract
has to be submitted at this time for the conference . The talk
would be based on the attached manuscript .
The findings presented in this manuscript have been

described in RDR, 1962, No . 14 . The discussion given in this RDR
• of the testing of indoles and carbazoles for carcinogenic activity
has, of course, been deleted from the manuscript even though all
of these tests gave negative results . The review of other hetero-
cyclic nitrogen compounds identified in tobacco smoke, e .g .,
9H-pyrido[3,4-b]indole (norharmane), 1-methyl-9H-pyrido[3,4-b]
indole (harmane) dibenz[a,h]acridine (1,2,5,6-dbenzacridine,
dibenz[a,i]acridine (1,2,7,8-dibenzacridine), and 7H-dibenz[c .g]
carbazole(3,4,5,6-dibenzcarbazole) was'omitted from our manuscript
because of the reported carcinogenicity of the latter three compounds
(cf . RDR, 1962, No . 14) .
Alan Ro n
AR :has
Attachment ~_j
~
B
Ln
m
~
~
~ Author : Alan Rodgman
Division : Chemical Research Notebook pages : non
RPI1, 1961, No. . IV Previous Reports :
RDiyl, 19j4, No . 31
RD,J", 19j5, No . 13
RDR, 1956, No . 10
RDR, 1959, No . 1
RDM , 21962, No . ~_.
N o . o f pabe ;: : . . :
THL SinOI' .I1TG AND...~

HEALTH PROBLEM --
.,,,., ..,._ . _
A CRITICAL AND OBJECTIVE APPRAISAL OF

The cigarette smoke-~h alTf7'problem is discussed in detail,
and it is related to the potential iinvolvement of the members of
the Company's Research Department .•Arguments and conclusions by
those claiming cigarette smoke as a health higrareggn4gdl as
counter-arguments and conclusions by those not in'~accord with
such views . The weight of the arguments and counter&arguments
is discussed in some detail . An attempt has been made to present
the argu :nents and conclusions as objectively as possible . Based
• on theAarguments and conclusions .,lazzaafteft several recommendations
are made .
Thii~w .em.t report is an extension of a companion memorandum
(7?) which presented my position as briefly and as concisely as Ln
N
possible . The two memoranda have identical schematic organizations . _J
F,
m
As mentioned before (77), if requested, a thorough, fully documented
Ln
exposition of the ideas will be prepared . m
~
OD
MEMORANDUM
Although the majDr part of the sales of this Company consists
of cigarettes, what the Company sells is cigarette smoke . To maintain
our first-place position a,ainst any eventual ity, we should be first
in :3csu :.si vio :l of 1 .'"ifo=mati on concerning the co! :?no-,z_L ;1. n
~ v-l 4n~..
ef=ects of cisareLte smoke .

. larin ~ t+1r~, pt;3t ~ :J o d °Ca~ .`2 : , c :. ;~are ~ :@ 5'!Or:° 11Ei s b CC :: ~ :" e. tc::'` !r r~
~: f a i,^ :a of studi es relating it to ill-health and par.ticular=y to
_u :' : carc := ."_'f2 e :Aa~',t;_ 1 vy of v :?8? Ztud i Bs ? ::~:=i i1rFiLr? c i
• , ,
J :.~i_ .? •. .1^ o~. G a`~ e all;h v l ei -iPoi lali .
-2-
~ . The Evidence - Pro and Con
~~ The cigarette smoke-lung cancer problem has been investiga ted
epidemiologically, pathologically, biologically, and chemically .
Each discipline has yielded pertinent information . The -rpidemiological
studies have also suggested a relationship between cigarette smoking
and other diseases .
a . Epidemiological Data_
It has been shown in thirty retrospective (27*, 38, 10,4, 118)
and in four prospective statistical studies (15, 27*) that the
1incidence of ]lung cancer is low in nonsmokers, proportional to
ci arette consumption, greater in ci .garette smokers than in cigar
or in pipesinokers (who show a higher incidence of oral cancer
than do cigarette smokers), greater in cigarette smokers who
inhale than in those who do not inhale, greater in cigarette
smokers continuing the habit than in ex-cigarette smokers, and
comparable in male and female cigarette smokers when smoking
duration, amount, and tumor type are considered (39, 1'•7) .
1'hese "findirigs'-indicate that cigarette'.smck3.pg inci•eases~:the . .sisk
of, .d'eve] :oping lung cancer .- Many-authorities : be~ieve •the . .relation-
ship to be one of cause-and-effect .
Contradictory data have been provided by statisticaL studies
which suggest that smoking habits (and possibly lung cancer) are
linked to a constitutional factor . The twin studies of Friberg et
al ., (36), Fisher (34, 3j), and Raaschou-Nielsen (65) indicatedd
a greater concordance of smoking habits between identical twins
than between fraternal twins . These studies, however, fall in the
*This author reviews 27 different retrospective studies

by Breslow,et al ., Denoix and Schwartz, Doll and Hill,
Haenszel et al .,' Koulumies, Levin et al ., Lombard
et =:1 . , McCor.nel= e t al . , ~,a11 : Gnd eortzr, ;:u11er,
= Otter and Tuli ;', S .ad4 :'JS ky at al ., Orhzirer and Sch on=nger,
./:3chrer, et ai ., :ci :'.VaL'tZ e ~ al . , ..~.tl7cks, o t ot;i.$ and CG .a~vc?_' ,
:assins., .atSOn cind Conte, ~,rync;er

' and v0=` ;:fir'1 1, '.,r~t,4er
• and
,_ .. ..a :-;, , a;;-nher and _Qmor. .
• * : hi8 :~Ut :'lOr r? /? e .JS the w rQS p ectltT2 Stie8 ~ ;~ 17oi1 and ?:i 11,
~ a 1+'K Horn, and Do r:: .

i
-3-
same category as some retrospective lung cancer-smoking
studies, i .e ., careful but limited . The Seventh Day Adventist
study of Wynder et al . (120) provides serious argument for
the constitutional hypothesis . Other contradi'ctory data were
provided by th,i immigration (and also retrospective) studies
of Eastcott 431~ in New Zealand and Dean (28, 29) in South
Africa . These studies compared national averages of cigarette
consumption with lung cancer mortality data for immigrants and
nonimmigrants . I .e ., in the lung cancer victims the actual
smoking habits of immigrants to Ne ealand and New Zealand-born
persons were not known ; similarly or the South African study .
To validate his findings, Dean (29) obtained smoking data .on
his sample by questionnaires addressed to the next of kin, a
practice decried in several of the retrospective lung cancer-
s ;.,oking studies . Nevettheless, the results of these studies. ~,
. `c,r..d
(28, 29, 31) can account for only a saall fraction of the ;lung `~^^
cancer incidence observed between smokers and nonsmo%ers .
The statistical data from the lung caacer-sToking .studies
are almost universally acc pted . The majority of scientists accept
these data as indicative of degree of association or a
cause-and-effect relationship between lung cancer and smoking .
Controversy is provided by Fis4er (34, 35), Berkson (14), Little
(j3A), Greene (37), and others . More will be said about their
comments in a subsequent section .
After more than ten years of argument oen ~D o methodology,
sampling bias, retrospective vs . prospective study, inhalation vs .
noninhalation, real vs . apparent increase in lung cancer incidence,
short butt-length vs . long-butt length, etc ., criticism of these
studies has been reduced to the dictum A statistical study cannot Ln
r iv. ~ r
orove a cause-2 ::d-e.f~nc~ ~ ea_tionshio be i.v ..~. e?n s~wo ~a C+- .-
LOr.tJ. N
J
m
b. a_ho_ogicRl_,ata m
Ln
he fo_lowing observ ;tions have been made : m
(a) Ci s FlrettP, s"1ciCeT_`s' lungs showprofound celli; l ar chc Isxe s
( s .~~.; a '"'" . ;sia , '^ ~
meLav== `" .~asl-ce= p Pr:~_1 a :' i~.
~ ^, ;? . . .. ~=•~'
~ :vrr
~ .us :1°"
atV 'p : .as ) w :' :s c :. Gre pr o7o~"ùl.~7nal t0 ci ~are ' te consu"'i~ ~1 .on
(c ; , ; ::ese c : .ang e s :Fcre .z,e i1~W_rrs :ive? -- _ .n t:,e _-
or proportion to the time inter- ;a1
-': -
between cessation of smoking and death (5), and similar
changes developrin= the? lungs of mice exposed to ci ;;arette
smoke (50-52) .
(b) Fluorescent constituents of cigarette smoke are absorbed
into respiratory tract cells of ,::an and experimental
animals (59, 60) . However, fluorescence and carcinogenicity
are not synonymous (17) . Carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbon
(benzoCalpyrene, dibenz [a,h3 anthracene) and noncarcinogenic
polycyclic hydrocarbons (anthracene, phenanthrene) are
highly fluorescent ; carcinogens like urethane, p-benzo-
quirione, and P-naphthylamine exhibit little or no fluores-
cence .
(c) 'rlhole cigarette smoke (46) and some of its constituents
(phenols, fatty acids) (33, 119) cause ciliary paralysis .
(d) Cigarette smoke collects at cilia-free areasnand at areas
of paralyzed cilia (33, 41) .
Contradictory evidence indicates the following :
(a) The above-described cellular changes can be caused by
previous respiratory diseases :-•:like. : influenza (2),
pneumonia °~
(107), Asiatic influenza (30),Apul~ :onary infarcts
(6) .,and by illnesses like uremia (105, 107) . ana vitamin
,7 deficiency .
These changes are )bserved to a degree in ir .fants (3), in
~ Aor3s :nokers (43), and in resid-~nts of areas of extreme
\ air pollution (106, 110) .
W These changes are observed in the tracheas (windpipes) of
~ smokers, but anceri60#40 tracheaIjis extremely rare
~ (43-45, 10,09 115) .
(d) Ciliary paralysis can be caused by air pollutants like
i::dust-i a? gases --2) and au' ;on,obi le e :{ :.aust ,7.,ases (=
~e) T:zere is no evi lencz t these c :_ar.;;ed ces ls ever becoê
cancerous .
fl Y1F'ci-,",t e £ :;2a v be s', . . . :':r ::i z e ~1 a s =0_ ", ciVs . - 1. ::ce _U= ar
-5-
chanEes in the lung ng and ciliary paralysis can be caused by

factors other than c ;garette smoke, since these changes occur
in nonsmokers' lungs and in the cancer-free trachea of smokers,
and since it is not known whether these changed cells become
cancerous~ ci~arette smoke, therefore, is not'1'ne only factor to
be blamed in lung cancer causation .
c . Biological_Data
Cigarette smoke condensate is carcinogenic to mouse skin (27*) .
Much is made of the fact that the dosage leve], used exceeds that
of the human exposure . Other investigators like Passey, Orr, Moore
and Miller (27**) did not obtain positive results with nominal
dosage levels ; Softe interpret this an indication that cigarette
smoke is not carcinogenic . It should be noted, however, that
many attempts were made to induce cancer in animals with coal tar
prior to the first success with highly unrealistic dosages (121) .
Kennaway ~44 .) :nommented on these negative findings as follows :
"The emphasis laid upon the collected negative results
of painting experiments from various laboratories, .and the
1 nders~resultsplicit•sugs~st
~Y •
r ~ suggest that these disoeesmokin
. . . . ., wher g
is concerned, the comparison of evidence from man and .from
animals may not .always be conducted with complete impartiality .
.~(.Positive results, if obtained by legitimate means, ~
must take precedence of negative results ."
Cigarette smoke condensate is a powerful ;romot6ng (or
rcinogenic) agent for polycyclic hydrocarbons (102) .
Inhalation studies with cigarette smoke have yielded an
increased incidence of adknomas in adenoma-susceptiblW~~~~ains
(32, 61) . No human-type carcinomas have been produced although
cellular changes and bronchitic conditions have (50-52) .
It is interesting to consider the studies of Campbell (see (108))
}f_' :_1S author reviews the swudies by Croninger and SuntZ?ff,
Guerin a'n d Cuzin, Koprowska, I- :oore and Bock, vrris et a? .,
: uSi,ara, 'Jynuer et al . ~
**M, his author reviews t'r.e studies by Pas ::ey, Orr, I'TocrE° and iilll@Y` . v
~
~
. . 1AA O .`Lt
\
i
, . . r.• .t , . . . .-- . l
. . . • -
i ..~ . . . . ~ . ~-` -
-6-
who obtained no increased .lung tumor incidence in mice inhaling
either autoinobmle exhaust gases or cigarette smoke . Subsequent
stud,y by others has shown that inhalation of exhaust gases and
at :. =osp'r.eric dusts incrd eased the adenoma incidence . Campbell's
negative findings with cigarette smoke are often quoted as
demonstration of the noncarcinogenicity of cigarette smoke ; seldom
is his evidence quoted to indicate the noncarcinogenicity of
air pollutants!
These negative inhalation results are interpretdd by some
as an indication that cigarette smoke is not a carcinogen for
human lung tissue . Two facts offset such thinking . First, mice
are not men, hence carcinomas should not be expected in a host
resistant to the induction of carcinoma of the lung, and whose
usual lung cancer is the adenoma (108) . Also, asbestos and sodium
arsenite, recognized industrial carcinogens, have not been shown
to be carcinogenic in animals (16) . Secondly, the ratio, lung
cancer deaths :total ci;arette smokers in the United States
. . .. ~ is approximately 1 :1700, hence an inhalation
experiment involving Tice would require 1700 animals for the
production of one carcinoma, assuming thsit the response of mouse
and human lung tissue wafhe same . No such number has been
used in any single experiment . T"ne 'biological :-findings are dismissed
by some with the statements Nice are not men ~.:nd Mouse skin is
not human lungL tissue, statements to which even the proponents
of the cigarette smoke-lung cancer proposition agree (116) .
d . Chemical Data
Cigarette smoke contains fourteen polycyclic hydrocarbons
(27*) and three heterocyclic nitrogen compounds (1-13) knourn to PIN
be carcinogenic to mouse skin . The hydrocarbons include nenzral
an thrace ne, benzo ~si,i~ per~~lPne, :~enzo~aj .~;rrene, benzo ~e3p .-ren, ,y
chrysene, dibenz [!j,h3anthracene, 1-metry lpyrene, cho_a :ahrane !84 ; ,
aibe ::zc pyrene, dibenzo Ca, llpyrene , di ;=:n.:cCa, i3 pyren :, ,
? , ~.-uih ;; Ctro-lH _ - b enzc Ca3 t°,~' clopen t~hlant :~=acer.e , ' C , ? _-ii :L ;;"k= o- ~
Ii
N
I (J~
cho_an ;?-irene . m
Ln
w
-7-
9H-benzoCa3cyclopent[i,anthracene, and benzCe3acepizer.a~ ~hrylene .
The heterocyclic nitrogen compounds are ?u-dibenzocarbazole,
dibenz~M,acridine, and dibenz La,Z3acridine .
Cigarette smoke also contains various promoting (or cocarcino-
Ezelnic) agents like the phenols and the fatty acids .
These findings, at dirst impugned, are now accepted but
dismissed as unimportant because none of the compounds has been*
shown to be carcinogenic or cocarcinogenic to h ruman lung tissue .
It is unlikely that such experiments will ever be carried out .
e . The Evidence to Date

Obviously the amount of evidence accumulated to indict
cigarette smoke as a health hazard is overwhelming . The evidence
challenging snch an indictment is scant . : :owever-, the evidence
from epidemiological, pathological, biological, and chemical
studies supporting the proposition that lung cancer is caused by
or associated with cigarette smoke is paralleled by similar
evidence supporting the proposition that lung cancer is caused
by or associated with air pollutants . In some instances, the
evidence seems to be stronger in sun-)ort of cigarette smoke
as Pcausative or associated factor ; in other instances, the
evidence ^seeas :: to be stronger in support of air pollutants as
a causative or associated factor .
Any criticism levelled at the lung cancer-cigarette smoke
proposition, e .g ., statistical studies annot prove cause-and-
effect relations in between two factors (a criticism of the
epidemiology) ; mice are not men (a criticism of the biological
evidence ) ; metaplasia and hyperplasia do not become cancerous
(Jcriticism of the pathological evidence) ; and no experimental
evidence exists to show that any cigarette smoke constituent is
carcinogenic to human =ur_& tiss .:e at `-ze 1?vel := t =r
ci ;'"%lreti,Pe ss^.:oke (a Cri tic].sT! of th+° chemical ev1 .d?ncc" , is
eq*ua'_'_y applica~ble to the l-ur:g cancer-ai= po :.lutc :. .t _= pcsit_on .
Ln
m
Ln
1Pb
-a-
~ . Interoretation of the E ,cidence (healt
After reviewing this evidence, many governmental~ag ncies
and medical societies throughout the world have concluded that
ty* i:t=.was ..sufficient to establish a cause-and-eff ct relationshin
between ci arette smoking and cancer of the lung .J~ ?ior.e stated that
:
smoke was the cause, the only~ cause, etc ., and many
acknowledged the role of air pollutants in the increased incidence
of lung cancer . None suggested that research on all other factors
be dropped in favor of a concerted study of cigarette smoke .
Theae agencies inuluded the American College of Chest Physicians (1),
the British Ministry of Health (27*), the British Medical Research
Council (27*), the Danish Joint Committee of the Danish National
Health Service, Dh Cancer Society, and the Danisr. :•:edical
Association (26), ~Tational Cancer Institute of Canada(27*), the
~
Netherlands Ministry of Social Affairs and Public Health (27*),
the Royal College of Physicians (Gt . Britain) (103), the United
States Study Grouf on Smoking and Health 1957 (27*), the United
States Public Health Service (27*), the World Health Organization
(27*), etc .
Com,aenting on such pronouncements, Little (~6), Scientific
irector, TIRC, said
"-Se will not find out from over-simplified and
perhaps superficial concl~}hi' .ons .on s as to causation .
Such an attitude would only stifle or delay needed
research to find the basic origins of lung cancer and
cardiovascular diseases, which are most powerful,
diversified and deadly enemies to our well-being . Nor
will they be solved by resolutions or by review
committees that cobcern themselves solely with
sugz,estive or incomplete data ."
At present in the Unite-EStates, this evidence is under
review b ;;r t wo 'r r ::upS, ti. e~Sur ;eorn ser.era l ' s r".C: vi a, . .r y Co ." - ; ''c? e on
" _huUts :or su :,1+::arizas :.ese o ;;inions .
• Smoking and Health and by a special committee of the American
Medical Association . It,wi11 be very surprising if their
conclusions differ substantially from those o .£ other groups cited .
It has been repeatedly stated tiiat some scientists discount
the cigarette smoke-lung cancer theory . This is true . But it should
be noted that many of those quoted in this regard are on record with
contrasting views . Scientists in this category include, among
others, Arkin, Berkson, Dean, Eastcott, Fisher, Hueper, Little,
Macdonald, Passey, Rigdon, and Rosenblatt .
Berkson is repeatedly quoted as one of the statisticians
disagreeing with the cigarette smoke-lung cancer data . However
Berkson's considered opinion is illustrated by his statement (13) :
" . . . . .the definitive important findingA these prospective
statistical studies is not that there is an association
between smoking and lung cancer, but that there is an
association between sir.oking and deaths from all causes
~ generally . . . . ."
The thesis that cigar6tte smoking was statistically associated
with a shortened life span was advanced almost a quarter of a
century ago (64) .
The statistical studies by Dean (28, 29) in South Africa
and Eastcott (31) in New Zealand cannot carry the weight ascribed
to them . Eastcott's study (31) did not compare immigrant and
nonimmigrant lung cancer victims with respect to their individual
smozing habits but with the yearly per capita consumpti n in
~obac o
New Zealand and the United Kingdom . Since the per capita . sumption
was greater in New Zealand than in the United Ifingdom and since
t:°:e number of i"1migrant lung c .: ;ncer victims ':la ;, ;_ea':er tflan the
n umbzr o c noz .immi grant lung cancer victims in New Zea,
and,
c snc -u d e d t, .".c:?: s .". :or.i2lg` ~:111 d
. n OV cGn r-OL : = 1S
arl;> >oan. (2c) d4.d not comnare i nd=vidua= : :'oa :1. :1 s h'c bi ts . ~Ln'
~
2 G ) ascertained j: :c
:a•t~-?!`, .:e ( the C :: :1=Sr ~
V ?O?=-=rI~~SS c7~ .c=TO~ . . . .. vJ .__t? 'i`,i :iS' :1 e a : Oi cn
~ a~rocedure cr :.ticitied pre v ioUS l ;y by re v iC w ?_r 8r8 of + l :°
,,, _ . .
-10-
::otin, member of the Scientific Advisory Committee, TIRC,

~ recently commented (40) on the conclusions of the 195! U . S .
Study group on Smoking and Health :
"The statement . . . . . .to the effect that 'The sum
total of scientific evidence establishes beyond reasonable
doubt that cigarette smoke is a causal factor in the
rapidly increasing incidence of human epidermoid cancer
of the lung' tepresents a view wi ;h which we concur ."
Little, Scientific Director, TIRC, stated in 1947 (5j, cf .
55) :
"Although no definitive evidence exists concerning
the relation between the use of tobacco in the instance
of lung cancer, it would seem unwise to fill the lungs
repeatedly with the suspension of fine particles of
tobacco products of which smoke consists . It is difficult
to .see .how such particles can be prevented from becoming
lodged in the walls of the lungs, and when so located,
how they can avoid producing a certain amount of irritation .
One might also question the ultimate results of continued
inhalation of the type of atmosphere which characterizes
the lower levels of city streets . Experimental work
with animals involving these matters is still inconclusive,
but it seems probable that the lung as an organ is not
immune to the ef'Lect of chronic irritation and that it
will in this resnect resemble the other organs of the
body . Such being the case, wisdom in avoiding unnecessary
lung irritation seems to be establ'ished ."
and more recently (58) :
" . . . . .in the first place we don't criticize the statistical
findings . We believe that they were honestly obtained and
that they show, under the conditions that they were collected,
a strong correlation which is suspicious enough to make it
imperative that further research be carried on . . . . . . "-
Hueper, long a proponent of the lung cancer-air pollutant
proposition, noted (42) :
"A~, .definite amount of reservation is indicated in accepting
the claims advanced by some parties concerning the role of
cigarette sr.:olcin ; as a direct or indirect factor in the
caU :a tiCli Gf lun z cancer . :`Te 'i r•rt ;leiZsS the type° :$nd a ;-, lount
of evi3enee on ti :is mat cer on :^.and J ustifies the conciusi on
uaa t ci~arettF .-r ;.;ci:in~ ,, ha . ~ co ::tYì au ted to or a s cr a v ate d the
a ctiCi :: of oL :~er c •-. r Cl n oèali .-I Zre :7~p ii a 4iir y p (i~•11•: tw n t~ J~7
~rC ::i;;ci?iy i~S_'U~?c :a~i ;;' fUnCt :i .O : :?i dl :•~i~r - c ~~eS sn in :, r 0 . :: h:i _~i
-:uc~sa . . . . . . .I t be .:,ost u::arise ., or. the ot :_-= hand ._~ _
t::r-,u~%j .x: r~ ;~.ar.,~era ted = .p?: ..si : P_ .:,cA•~. : :. ` : . s ~ ~ --=' ::: ~: ~ _
of cigarette smoking, the studly . . . .of air pollutants would
be impaired and neglected . The available evidence raLher
definitely assigns to these factors an important ro ;e as
human respiratory carcinogens ."
And Passey (63), who does not believe that lung cancer results
from the action of carcinogens ; sai5 :
"I do not belittle the important part which smoking
plays [in lung cancer causation,] . My aim is to sugèst
its mode of action . In fact, I would say that- .-it is
dan ;erou s to smoke . "
Additio(Vl citations could be given but these few suffice
for now .
III . The Tobacco Industry's Contribution

To investigatre the cigarette smoke-health situation
The Tobacco Industry (except for ift Liggett and Myers Tobacco
Company) has given about five million dollars to TIRC since 1954
~~-- for research . According to Little,(54), its Scientific
Director, the purpose of TIRC is
~ " . . . .to encourage and support qualified research
scientists in their efforts to learn more about these
complex problems [cancer and heart diseasz'' ."
Through December 1961, TIRC grantees publ ished 197 papers
(56,", 57) . Of these, 36 were concerned with the chemistry od
toooacco and its. smoke ; 47 with cancer research ; 13 with human
lung studies ; 78 with heart and circulation studies ; 4 with
gastrointestinal tract studies ; 5 with psycho-physiologiL\-cl
studies ; and 14 miscellaneous studies (lung cancer reviews,
tobacco-health textbook) .
I believe that much of this research, particularly that
on the chemical, biochemical, and biological study of tobac-co Ln
~
~,nd its smok e could have and .:shoul . ' :zave ~-~e :r. ou ; ;n _Q
~
m
, . : e : .`~ a e :.z .- c h d ..t~'~artalents of the tobacco co'a p aa_es* .
Ln
m
U1
*1'2:e Î : l1 i~rantBP isGlate4'~ and characterized C-'- ;,'C.''O r ;,- ::1C'~t? r_° 0°
Gri'~'.~ su :'7sef,uently UuyJli sl?ed hi . _°i :?!lin'c';s : A 3_m 1=P. '_' S1.url,;," 'tira :
out in t ._i s Ccmr.~r%n ;;-' s~ C. i'._ .._.
. . . ~ = , . ~. . ,.. . ._y.y -: , t~"' ~ ,v ._
~
. L 4
. i 'e~. +.
~, , :, ~l, y~
~ .. . ': ~. ~~ •~ . .. 'r,
. .'J,J . ._ .ac . C7'a n. . :r_ . .~J , s cl.~l~?v1 :1, a ^T .s`_

.: A . .~ _Il ~' . :a.CCV .::
n o:. oi. P
-12-
"'he meml:ers of this CompGny's Research Department are as

qualified,as objective, and as interested in learning
~ " . . . .more about these complex problems . . ." (to quote Little (541))
as scientists not employed by abobacco-rnanufacturer .
Concerning qualification of research persons, it is interesting
to note the criticism of cigarette smoke inhalation studies (pre-
sumably those of Essenberg) by Little in 1957 (55) :
"These poor beasts are usually put in practically an
air tight container, and smoke is pumped in and pumped

in in such quantities that the white rats become yellow
or yellowish brown . . .
.'1 Acvl~~
and to relate this criticism to observations made (51) inAcigarette
smoke inhalation studies (50-52) conducted by a TIRC grantee :
"Depending on the time of exposure, the fur of the
exposed mice gradually changed from white to yellow

to darkish brown . . . ."
This smoke inhalation project was activated on September 1, 1957,

over a month after Littlefs criticism of such techniques .
If a coordinated chemical, biochemical, and biological research
program on the tobacco-health problem were undertaken by the members
of this Companyts Research Department, the findings made could not

have any more adverse effect on the Tobacco Industry in general or
on this Company in particular than those reported JW* (56,57) OW

OW by ~ TIRC grantees or associates, Kotin and Falk (parA,lysis
S
~ ~ .
of cilia with cigarette smoke and components),

Leuchtenberger (cellular changes produced in the lungs of mice
exposed to cigarette smoke), Bock, Moore, and Homburger (tumor
production with cigarette smoke), Kosak (isolation of carcinogenic

0
-13-
compounds compounds from :cigarette smoke), etc . It may be advantageous in

the future for our Research Department personnel to have experi-
ence in studies involving test mammals, particularly if govern-

mental restrictions are imposed because of conclusions reached
by the recently appointed Surgeon General's Advisory Committee
on Smoking and Health . One of the five observers at the first

meeting of this Committee was a Division Director of the Food
" ~ and Drug AdministrationAMembers of this Research Department
have studied in detail cigarette smoke composition (8, 9, 1$-24,
47-49, 68-77, 79-101, 114) . Some of the findings have been pub-
lished (19, 22, 24, 74, $0, $2, $9A, 91, 94, 96, 9$, 100) . How-
ever, much data remain unpublished because they are concerned with
carcinogenic or cocarcinogeniccompounds (23, 47, 4$A, 6$-72, 75,
_ 76, 78, 84-86, $$-, 92, 101, 114.) or with patentable material
(83, 89) . This raises an interesting question about the former

compounds . If a tobacco company plead "Not guilty" or "Not proven"*
to the charge that cigarette smoke (or one of its constituents)
is an etiological factor in the causation of lung cancer or some

other disease, can the company justifiably assume the position
that publication of data pertaining to cigarette smoke composition
or physiological properties should be withheld beeause such data

might affect adversely the companyts economic status when the
company has already implied in its plea that no such etiologic
effect exists?
It is not my intent to suggest that this Company accept the
E .g ., Lartigue vs . Reynolds Tobacco Co . and Liggett and Myers

Tobacco Co ., Greene vs . American Tobacco Co ., and Pritchard
vs . Liggett and Myers Tobacco Co .
-14-
cigarette cigarette smoke-health data at fAce value, but I do suggest that
this Company, through its Research Department, actively partici-
pate in'cigarette smoke-health studies . Other Companies (General
Motors Corporation (7), Imperial Tobacco Company (Great Britain)
(10-12)) have reported their findings on the air pollution-

health problem and cigarette smoke-health problem, respectively,
without apparent loss of prestige (or income) .

IV . Recommendations
After consideration of the evidence available on the cigarette
smoke-health problem and the Company's obligation* to its customers,

stockholders, and employees, it is recommended that facilities,
animals, and personnel (where necessary) be acquired to study
biologically cigarette smoke, tobacco, tobacco .and additives .

This recommendation has been made kv*aw by Teague (111)
in 1953, by Rodgman in 1954 (66), in 1955 (67), in 1956 (68A),

in 1959 (72), and in 1962 by Nielson (62) and Rodgman (77) .
Data from such studies may be invaluable if governmental restric-
tions are imposed as a result of the conclusions of the Surgeon
Generalts Committee on Smoking and Health . It is, I believe, moEe

urgent than ever that we acquire dexterity in biological tech-
niques .
* It is nterest ng to note remar s like y on t t eyt do
something about the liquor industry? After all, there are an
estimated four million Americans classified as alcoholics . Alco-
holism •im not only is a health hazard to the drinker but also
causes untold anguish to his family ." or "What about the meat-
packing industry and the supposed relationship of stturated ani-
mal fat to cholesterol-caused circu&atory disorders and heat.YC :
disease? After all, many more persons die of heart disease than
lung cancer ." These remarks may have some justification, but
~ attempts to minimixe our obligations by pointing an accusing
finger at others is no solution to the cigarette smoke-health
problemi
-15-
It is recommended that data already available on physiological3r
~ active cigarette'smoke components, e .g ., polycyclic hydrocarbons,
phenols, be published . It is also recommended that analytical

procedures concerning such compQnents be published .~
_. ....,
These recommendations are made because I believe they repre-
sent the best answer to the questions : What effect would immedi-
ate publication of these data have on this Company's economic

would be the
. status? What/effect on this Company of not publishing these
data now, but being required at some future date to disclose

such data, possibly in the unfavorable atmosphere of a lawsuit?
It is recommended that the Company'is supervisory personnel

be provided with reports like the Royal College of Physicianst
report Smoking and Health, the Annual Report of the Scientific
~, Director (TIRC), and other pertinent review articles just as

~ they were provided with Northrupts book Science Looks at Smoking,
the pamplets Tobacco and Health, and "favorable" articles such

as the one from Life entitled New Evidence That Cancer May Be
Infectious . In this way, the Companyts supervisory personnel

will be better informed about the cigarette smoke-health problem
than they would be if their main informat ion sources were the
daily newspaper, Readerts Digest, etc .

And finally, it is recommended that the Company's manage-
ment recognize that many members of its Research Department are ~

~~,,
A~
intensely concerned about the cigarette smoke-health~prmSand
.%,
eager to participate in ' study and solution . A
Ln
F-.
., . . ~
• L,
mCh
. ~. . •
nIBLIOGRAPHY
• 1 . American College of Chest Physicians, Statement on

Cigarette Smoking . DIS . CHEST, 42, 233(2 .
2 . Andrial, M ., Tracheal and Bronchial S ;:uamous Metan?asia

-a M:.A . AR H . _z'
in Influenza .. ., 68o, 94- 2 5° •
3 . Auerbach, 0 ., Stout, A . P ., Hammond, E . C ., and Garfinkel,

Microscovic Examination of the Bronchial Epithelium in
Children . . .1ll'Ll{• . A a I ! J 40-64 e 60
4 . Auerbach, 0 ., Stout, A . P ., Hammond, E . C ., and Garfinkel, L . 0
Changes in Bronchial Epithelium in Relation to Ci arette
Smokin and in Relation to Lun Cancer . NEW ENG . J . MED .,
265, 253-267 (1961) .
5 . Auerbach, 0 ., Stout, A . P ., Hammond, E . C ., and Garfinkel, L . I

Bronchial E ithelium in Former Samol :ers . iTE .J ENG . J . MIE : .,
267, 119-125 (1962) .
6 . Balo, J ., Juhasz, E ., and Temes, J ., Pulmonar- Infarcts and

Pialmonar,y Carcinoma . CANCER, 2, 918-922 (1956) .
7 . Begeman, C . R•, Carcino•genic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in

Automobile_E_ffluents . Paper presented at 1962 Automotive
Engineering Con~;ress, Detroit, Mich ., Jan . 8-12 (1 ;62) .
8 . ~ellin, S . A ., Hi her :att Acids in the Smoke Cor.densate

of Burley and Flue-cured Tobaccos ._ A actori'a~~7e ~n
Exuer? ment Showing the Effect of Variation of' Ci arette
Pioisture~ ~J~ht and Tobacco Type . RDR, 1~_,~~ No . 8 (Feb . 6) .
9 . jBellin, S . r1 . ,Tftentification of C and C Saturated

#:~ Fatty Acids and, C16, C1? Unsa ;;rated ~'?atty Aci ds in
Tobacco and in Smoke . RDR, 1962, No . 5 (Jan . 29) .
10 . Bentley, H . R ., and Burgan, J• G ., Polybuclear Hydrocarbons
in_Tabaac~.ancLTQb~tccSL~rioke, I• 3,4-3e_ neDrene . AN .4LYS^,
8~, 442-447 (1958) .
11 . Bentley, H . R ., and Burgan, J . G ., Polynuclear H`drocatbons
in Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . TI . The of . ..
3.en, ;;-~re :~e Fourid _ in ...r'~4 :'~~ unu__m9oac-g ~sr ;or:a- .i:?'ALYa'f,
~~ ?23-727 ~1q60)• -
12 . 3entley, H . R ., and 3urgan, j . :, Po1~-~uclear _:iy:~~,ncan ~ :ns
in Tona.cc .ô and 'ô ;- cco
• ~-.- -E
r,v ,~-
F q r,a :•~,ion cf 3,4 -~a "- r~ z c:~ _~~ • • ~ cne in r_~ 9 rx:e
~.
{ 1': r)0 ) .
Un
m
ON
w
13 . Berkson, J . The Statisticel Investi tion o Smoki nM a na ance
Lung . J, 0
• • 1
].1,. . Berkson, J ., Smokin and Cancer of the Lun . PR.OC . STAFF . MPG., MAYO CLIN .,
a, 367-3g5 (1960) .
]5 . Best, E . W . R ., Josie, G. H ., and Walker, C . B ., A Canadian Study of Mortality

in Relation to Smokin Habits . A Preliminar Re ort . CAN. J. PUB . HEALTH, L2t
99-1041961)0
16 . Boqland, E., The Biolo ical Examination of Carcino enic Substances . BFtIT . 2~D ;
BULL ., 11 (2 ) , 93-9 (1958) .
17. Bruce, W. F ., Carcino dr e s V A C ence

Intensit of Cholant e and Certa n o I Hom J . AM. CHEM. S6C ., ,,,,2,
304-305 (1941) .
18 . Cook, L. C ., and Rodgman, A ., Th®_ Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . XXIII .
a- and -Isv nt no id om Turk h To ~ . RDR,~ , No . 21 pr . .
19 . Cook, L . 0 ., and Rodgman, A ., ..The Com osition of Ci ar tt Smoke . VIII - and

R-Levantenolide from Turkish Tobacco Smoke . TOBACCO SCIENCE, 1, 32-33 (1962) .
20. Cook, L. C ., and Rodgman, A .,_ The Analysis 'of Cig,arettQ Smokg Co„Dd,gnsate . ~V.
12a-?i dro -- =..- RDR, _1261, No . l,l+
Sept . 22 .
• 21 . Cook, L : C :, Rodgman, A ., and Ypung, G. W., The Analysis o Ci rett Smok

. Condensate . RVI . Normal Lone-chained Primary Alcohols . RDR, ,1260, No . 22 (July 1) .
22 . Cook, L : C ., Rodgman, A ., and Young, G . W ., The Com osition of Ci arette Snoke .

VII. Normal Lon :chained Prima Alcohols . TOBACCO SCIENCE, 1, 6-10 ?91 .
23 . Cur*_diff, R. H., Gross Se aration and Determination of the Phenolic Fr ction from
Toba cco Smoke Condensa tes . RDR, ", No . 9 Feb . ]4
24 . Cundiffp R . H ., Sensabaugh, A . J., Jr ., and Vlarkunas, P. C ., -Ti_tXetric

Determination of Acid Fract e . TOBACCO SCIENCE, _6, 25-27
1962 .
25 . Dalhamn, T ., Studie8_~n, .t1~ FffACt of &,1 f,rr D

Ra bbit Tra chea in Vivo a nd in Vitr~o ,ra r4 on the Res or, ., ~t,~on_al CaP,a o~ the
P~as~l Cavity, AM. REV. RESPIRAT . DISEASES,'~ 566-567 ~].9611T.
26 . Danish Joint Committe,,Tobacco and Lung Cancers Deliberations of the

Danish Joint Committee with Particular Attention to Cisa ette Smdsing .
DANISH ?dCD . BULL ., 2, 99-11 (1962)0 -
27 . Davies, D . F ., A Review of the Evidence on the Relationshi between Smoking

and Lun~ Cancer . . Cn.'~ONIC DIS ., U1,, 579 14 19 0 .
• 28 . Dean, G., Lur.,, Cancer Among ;v,aite South Africans . &RI'i'. i-M) . J ., 1M (ii),
552-557 .
c$
29. Dean, G ., Lun Cancer Amon White South Africans . Re ort on a Further Stud .
BRIT. I4ED . J ., 1s61 ii , 1599-1605 .
30 . de Baan, P ., Lon afwi kin en bi Aziatische Influenza . NED : TIJDSCHR . CEiTy' SK.,
19L 721-726 1959 .
31 . Eastcott, D . F., The Epidemioloay of Luna Cancer in New Zealand . LANCET,

1~6_ (i ), 37-39 .
32 . Essenberg, J. 24., Ci arette Smoke and the Inc idence of Prima Neo 0 lasm
. of the Lung in the Albino Mouse . SCIENCE, 1,1 561-56-2 1952 .
33 . Falk, H . L., Tremer, H. M., and Kotin, P ., Effect of Ci arette Smoke and Its
t n Ci ate cus-seoretin h ithe ium . J . NAT . .,
~, 999-1012 4959) .
34 . Fisher, R . A ., Lung Cancer and Cigarettes? NATURE, 182 . 108 (1958) .
35 . Fisher, R . A ., Cancer and Smokin . NATURE, 182, 596 (1958) .
36 . Friberg, L ., Ka~.J, L ., Deneker, S . J ., and Jonsson, E . ; Smoking Habits of

Monozyr~otic and Dizygotic Twins . BRIT . MED . J., = ~i), 1090-1092 .
37 . (hreene, H . S . N., Introduction to "Science Looks at Smoking, ' by E . Northrup,

New York, N . Y ., Coa~ard-MeCann, Inc ., ~. '
38 . Haenszel, W., Loveland, D . B ., and Sirken, P?.. G., Lung Cancer I3ortaiity as Related
to Re ' n e and Snokin Histories . I . White Males . J. NATL . ~.aNCr'~ LWST .,
2, 947-1000 (1962) .
39 . Haenszel, W., Shimkin, :~I. B ., and Mantel, N ., A Retrospective Stud of Lun

Cancer in Women . J. NATL . CANCER INST ., ~, 825-842 1958 .
40 . Hamilton, J . D ., Sepp, A ., Brown, T . C ., and 2~cDonald, F . W ., I•3or holo cal

Changes in S~nokers' Lungs . CAi1. i~D : ASSOC .,J ., ~ 177-181 (1957) .
41 . Hilding, A . C ., Cigarette Smoke and Physiolo~ic Drainage of the Bronchial Tree .

DIS . CILST, ~, - 2 .
42 . Hueper, W . C ., Kotin, P ., Taber, E . C ., Payne, W. W ., Falk, H . L ., and Sawicki, E .,

Carcino enic Bioassa s on Air Pollutants . Paper presented at 53rd Ann . I~ftg ., Air
ollution Control Assoc ., Ci~icinnati, Ohio, Diay 25 (1960) .
43 . Ide, G., S~ntzeff, 'y ., and Cowdry, E . V., A Com arison of th- Fistoaatholo of
Tracheal and Bronchial Epithelium of Sinokers a s onsmokers . C~~~r~i., 12,
473-4 4 1959 .
44 . Kennaway, B . L ., ' Some uestions on Cancer of the Lun ., Ler~nx and Urinary Tra ct .
BRIT . i•~D : J ., 1~7 i, 299-306 .
45 . Iinudtson, K . P ., The P,.tnologic Effects of S~~okinT Tobacco on the Tra_c'aea and

Bronchial 1•~ .icosa . ~i ;ri. J . CLZ•I . PdT ;zOL ., ~, 310-317 9 0 .
46 . Kotin, P., and Filk, '~I . L•., The Role and Action of Envi_ronmental Aents in
the PFthogenesis
.. . . . . .. .
of. . Jung
. .
Cancer . _II . Ciarstte
. . . ..~ . . ~. . .~. :r'
5mo :ce... CaIC•.~, ~ 250-262 (1960) .
~
51710 5065
A
47 . Latimer, P . H ., Thd Determination of Phenol in Ci rette Smoke . RDR~

1961, No . 37 (July 25 .
48 . Laurene, A . H ., The Com °sotion of the Vapor Phase of Cigarette Snoke .

RDR, =, No . (Oct . 17) .
!,.$A . Laurene, A . H ., and Young, G . W ., The Develo, pmen,t of a t~ss Suectrometric

Analvsis of Phenols in Tobacco Saaoke . RDR, 1961, ,No . 38 July 25 .
49 . Laurene, A . H ., Young, G. W ., and Ch•eene, G. H ., The Quantitative Analysis

of Cigarette Snoke . Part I . RDR, 1, No . 20 (Sept ; 4 .
5 0 . Leuchtenberger, C ., Leuchtenberger, R ., and Doolin, P . F ., A Correlated

Hiatolo~ical, Cttological and Cytochemical Studp of the Tracheobrenchial Tree
of Lungs of 2dce Eacposed to Cigarette Sinoke . I . Bronchitis with Atypical
1958) ~a ~ - h~go~,in 2- i ce Ex~osed to Ci~arette Snoke . CANCER, 7 , 490~06
.
51. Leuchtenberger, C ., Leuchtenberger, R ., Zebrun, W ., and .Shaffer, P.,

A Correlated Histolo ical C tolo cal and C tochemioal Stud of the,
r~eo eeobro+ ncTi a ee o ce ose to~~aret e Smoke . IT. Varying
~esnses of t~a or Bronc~ii~o Ci arette Smoke Absence of Broncho enic
Carcinoma After olo osure and sa earance of Bronchial Lesions
._ er s sa on o ,_~,osure . C A ,12, 21-7 2 (1960) .
52 . Leuchtenberger, R ., Leuchtenberger, C ., Zebrun, W ., and Shaffer, •P .,

A Cor e H ca C a nd C Stu of the
Tr e ial Tr of Mice ed to Ci rette Smoke . III . Unaltered
Incidenc of Grossl Adenomatous Lun Tumors in Fema e ce After
Prolonged Exnosure to Cigarette Smoke . CANCER, Ia. 95 -95 (1960) .
53 . Little, C . C ., "Cancer, A Stlzdy for Laymen", Aw .¢Y~ta~ Caca~Y ,
53A . Little$ C . C ., Smokinu and Lung Cancer . CANCER RESEARCH, ]6, 183-184 (1956) .
54 . Little, C . C ., 1956 Re ort of the Scientific Director . TOBACCO IdDUSTRY

RESEARCH C02-II , .
55 . Little, C . C ., Statement in "False and `,&sleading Advertising (Filter-Tip N

Cigarettes)"9 Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on ~
Government Qoeratiens, House of Representatives, 85th Congress, July 18-26 ~
(1957), 34-61 . ~
~
56 . Little, C . C ., 1960 Report of the Scientific Director . TOB4CO rJDLS711 0
RISLAH,CH C0nr'II'M'Ezr,-116b . w °i
57 . Little, C . C ., 1961 3eport of the Scientific Rirector . TOB :CCO Ti'TDTZ3RY .

. msEA:wa C0: t•f-TTTy, 9 ,_b~. F r'
58 . Little, C . C ., Tn„terview, CBS~.

Re,vorts ..~ ae Smoker . Text of a televis ion
- The Teen-a
.~...;......_.
program, Columbia Broadcasting System, Sept . 12, ,]a2 .
.10
59 . MeTlors, R . C ., Cellular Localization of Fluorescent Products Derived

from Cigarette Smoke : ._Studies_ in Ncnerimen aimals and in bi~n
~luorescence ~Scrosco
. . . ~.. W. Y... r. _.... Y.. _......,.. .~dP~ J.^PATIiOL ., -1957, 611 .
60. Nlallors, ft . C ., M~,co~onic Localization of Tobacco Smoke Products ian

the 4.esniratow
... vnsw.- .+.. .
r~,~Tracts
~..wwn..
of Animals E7cnosed to~ Ci .rette Smote . rR OC . AI4.
e .w
ASSOC . CAi•1CER ;fSARCH, 2_Ù, 325 (1958) .
61 . Muhlbock, 0 ., Carcinogene Werkina van Si arettenrook -ihiizen

bi . ?`MD.
TUDSCHR. GENEESK ., c)2, 22?-2278 (1955) .
62 . Nielson, E . D., A Pronosed Research Program of Biolo i~Testing . RDId,

19.66z,, No . 113 (NOV . 19 .
63 . Passey, R . D ., Some Problems of Lung,Canoer . LANCET, , 1,2 (i),, 10?-112 .

.yy.~F ~.yYMM/10 .aY~a.
M/Y Yi iM
64 . Pearl, R ., Tobacco Smoke and Longevity . SCIr,'•JCE, 87, 216-217 (1938) .

.. .. ._...,~._
,
65 . R.saschou-2lielson, E ., .._,t
Smokina_Habits
---. .....,...,in ... .__.. . DA:dISH rED . BULL . p _, 82-
Twins.
._ . .w...~
88 (1960) .
66 . Rodg*nan, A ., The Synthesis of Various Substituted Phenols for Use as

Flavorants in o cco o uc s . , , No . E . .
67 . Rodgman, A ., The Fractionation of Ci. .~ret~te

. "" __
Smoke
______r _. . . ... Tars . RDId,
._ .... and,~
=, No . 13 (AP .
68 . Rodgman, A . The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . I. The

lation and or dentificati~on o~f PolXc~clic Aromatic drocarbons in
.~
""CANLEL Cia2rette Smoke Con nsate . ~RDR, ]„ .16b, No . 9 SEPP . 28) .
4 rw . ~wi
68A . Rodgman, A ., The Pre ration of Some Phenolic Flavorants . RDR, 12~6,
No . 10 (OCT . 1 .
69 . Rodgman, .A . , _s_iE_o_f__Cin__ette_ Smoke Condens-Q,te . II . The Pr_e-

t r°9~m,gnt QfC4,'Z, L QPnd Tobacco . RDR, 195 6_ No . 12 (NOV . 1 . ~
70 . Rodgman) A ., The Ana;ysis_ of Ci,a,arette Smoke Condensate . III. Flue-

cured Tob,;cco .=D. v y ~
71 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Ci rette Smo e Condensate . IV . 3,4,g,9

Dibenzv ene in CAMEL Cigarette Smoke Condensate . RDR, ,_o .
OCT . 17 .
72 . B,od,,~n, A ., The Analysis of Ci,sratte &-aoke Ccndensete . VI . The

Influence of anl'c ve`n~ .. .._ ... . r..r .e.. ...treatr.tent
. .•..u.. oìb~ia cco and { %,-her F i~ c ~or s on the
..
Pol* c clic H,-droc~rbon
. . .
.......r,. ~. .• .,..., .. . Con~ont . c=
...,: ,~ricqa~yCo:irens=te
.. . .~.. .. . . :~Dd", 1 ;5a,~i1o . ~l
JA .~d. 29 :
73 . Ro%,grmn, A .,
aDa, 1 7 Q, No . 11 ( : I:lY 1~ ) .
N1
• 74 . Rodgman, A ., The Com osition of Ci arette Smoke . III. Ph adienes .

J. ORG . CHE:•i., 2,~1. , 191 -1924 (1959) .
75 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis c .f Cigar.ette Smoke C-ndensate . X. The

Effect of PoxNous Paper and or Filter Tip IJaterials or Aluminized
Pauer anaior ~ .umina aaca.zive t!te*
b~r~,r' nolas
etalst•ll1 . .. ....._...._..
i on
uom an
~"~~"`MiY'lb `rotal
.,
76 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . SIC . The
De,ter~,-n.~in,ation ,of Pol c.....clic
.,.... . Aromat
... . . c drocarbons
.-..~...,.._. . +~'~; 6f; i13" . 1
JAN .
'111R
~ cjg% n~., t
H 1 ~: A ~ a
h sittW96 on .o~~ C_i6~~ rett~' Smo e, Smo~cipg, ~pnd
H;~I, 2, ~1+To .
77. Rodgman, A ., The Smoking and Health Problem - A Critical and Ob ective
.Appr~ a~ i 1. RV1i, 1 , No . ! .
78 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Arialsis of CiAarette Smcke Condensate .

V . The Pol c olic H drocarbon Precursors in Tobacco . RDR, IM, No . 1
DEC . .
79 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analsis of Ci arette Smoke Condensate .

VII . Solanesol and Solanes 1 Ace eta
r.... .
. RDR, IM, o . 22 DECOMM~_
80. Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., e mnosition of Ci r~ret~e Saoke .......I.

~ u,.w.. ..
SolaneUl Acetate .
.t~e TOBACCO SCIFNCE, I, 86-88 (1959) .
81 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Anal sis of Ci rotte Smoke Ccndensate .

7~Iq :aUoZjL,a,rol . RDR, IM, No . 23 (SEPT . 29 .
82 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., ~,no t o Ci arette Smoke . IV.

Toco herol . TOBACCO SCIENCE, /~, 7-8 1960) .
83 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The A al sis of Ci arette .Smoke CondPnsate .

XIIIy Sclareolide from Turkish Tobacco Smoke . RDR, =0, No .8 (M 1 .
84 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L. C ., The :ln 1 si of Ci arette Smoke Condensate' .

i Aroiaatic H drocarbons . RDR, 19 , No . 20 AMY 2 .
85 . Rodgwn, A ., and Cook, L . C ., T'h_e_AnglYs.Ls ..°f Oi arette Smoke Condensate .

e ect of Alumi !S "no d Catal sts on Total c
H d ca bo s Total Solide and Nicotine . RDR, 10c60, No . 36 DEC . 2 .
86 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., Th~ysis of CiL7r, rstte S .7oke Condensate .

XVIII . Chloranil and 2r7-'s~initrofluorenone
.,_. _. a s Fi? torViip
.. ~aditives .
RDB,, 1,~~0, ido . 3S7T~~C. 7) .
a7 . R.odg.nan, A ., and Coo :c, L . C ., The Anal sis >.

~ ....M..~ of Ci~arotto
.. . . ..:? : ..r- . Smc'a
. ..~ CondQns .te .
XX. 1,,~,tote on the Normal Long-caained F3riria_ry ~?cono•lsi~ .. :~n ddrendtua.to
.
8£i . Rodg.nan, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Anal sis of Ci ar,?tte Smoke

~, ; JOCI .
Phenols ; RDR, 12.61, No . 10 (FEB . 23 .
89 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analvsis of Ci~,arette Smoke Condensate .

' . ~h va e ,.
T h obacco S~noke . RDR, ~, No . 42 (ATJG . 18) .
S9 .A. Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C .p The Com osition of Ci rette Smoke . X.

12ac-HydroL i ovl . Oxid e fr m Turkish Toba cco mo . TO ACCO
SCIENCE, 6, 123-124 (1962) .
90 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C .•, The Anal sis of Ci rette Smoke Condens :ite .
p c ic Nitro en Com ounds n Tur ish obacco Smo
E o . 14 JUI~ 21 .
91 . Rodgman, A ., a nd Cook, L . C ., The Composition of Ci arette Smoke . ~ XI.

Heteroc clic Nitro en Comoounds in Turkish Tobacco Smoke . TOBdCCO
SCIENCE, §~, ~174-177 (1962) .
92 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The .An?l sis of Ci arette Smo e Condensate .

KXVII . Eu enol and Isoe enol . R, 1_962_, No . 15 ITNE 21 .
93 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., Bellin, S . A ., Mims, S . S ., and Young, G . W.,

The Anal sis of Ci aratte Smoke
. ., ..,.,,. . .,, .. , ~Condensate
.. ..,~.w ........ ∎...... ,.
..~. XXII.
. .,..... ~., ,....The
,. Comnosition of an
Aliph~,#y~ o~st~~r k~a ction fr om Toba cco and Toba~+. eco Snoke
.~. . ..~r.+ .-
. RDR, 1961 , No . 15
( Mr1R . 27 .
• 94 . Rodgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., Bellin, S . A ., Mims, S . S ., and Young, G . W ., The

Comnosition of Ci arstte Smoke . IX An A,linhatic Ester Fractio ,from ~
Tobacco and Tobacco oke . T0 CCO SCIENtCE;~"k, 4(1962)': -`r `
95 . Rodgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Chappell, C . K ., The Analvsis f Ci~ratte

Smoke Condensate . XV . Compa•rison of Different ~òbacco Types . nR, 11,60,
Mo . 21 JUP1E 30 .
96 . Rodgroanp A ., Co .ok, L . C ., and Chappell, C . K ., The Comos

~ ition of Ci . ar
~ ett,e
S~oXe.,,.,,,_VI_k n rison of Different Tobacco Types . TOBACCO C NCJ 0
1-5 (1961) .
97 . Rodgtnan, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Latiner, P. H ., The Anai"rsis og Cigarette

Smoke Condensate . VIII . Solanes 1 Esters and Phytosteryl Esters . RDR,
98 . Rodgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Latimer, P . H ., The C.:,.voosition of_Ci~~~retz9

. Smoke . II
.. ........_,.,~~_ ..., ..._:aqsXl ana ._Pnytostorll,Estors . TOBACCO SCI^?TC3, 1, 125-12C
. Sola
..,,..~_
99 . Rodgman , A . , Coo :, L . C ., and ?fi;.s, S . S ., The Ana]~,y_sis of

,.....,•...,. . . ...
Cigarette
. n .. ~ ...
+. m.- .
Smoke
Condensate . :{II. Scualenes and Solanesenes . RDR, b0-, No . Ln
~"~.wM...-a..wvr..w,.ns.c.:wtw-ssv..css .r`+Aw.na.-iR.r ∎w~.rrt~f.•_w+..a. . N
v
F-+
100 . Rodgman, I ., Cook, L . C ., rnc '•Iims, S . S ., Tne_ C e~mDositir.+n . o_t Cihr_,v 4- ,e m
'. . V
.S ~1{P
..ws.ww . SolanFSenes
..n .s.n..
.
... . .u.. . . . .,. ....,r .w.. ..
J.
0?G
. . C"1
s~. ., 2o : I, 97-501
• CJ1
m
Ch
l0
1 3
101 . Rodgman, A ., and t•1ims, S . S ., The Anal sis of Ci . arette Smolse Condensate .
XXIIIII ._Possi,ble__Precu_rsors in Tobacco of enols n o acco !ao e . -""
W/VMdR'ILIAIYI~Y/. . .
RDR in preparation .
102 . Roe, F . J . C ., Salamin, 14 . H ., and Cohen, J., I om-?lete Carcino ens :in
Ci ga-r-e-tte Smoke Condensates Tumour Promotion a Fhenolic Fraction .3cIT.
J: CANC~ 33 .
103 . Royal College of Physficians, "Smoking and Health" . New York, N. Y ., Pitman
Publishing Corp ., 1.~,62 .
104 . Saboux, M. S ., Osman, L . M., Glem, J ., Fahy, T ., and ILamb, P ., C4c

of the Lungs .R vi~ew of J09ses,: DIS . CHEST, Al, 530~'j46 (1962) .
1% . Sanderud, K., Squamous ithelial Meta lasia in the Respirato.ry rTiact in

Ur,~nmj.e,~,. BRIT. J . C.ANCER, ~, 2 -
106 . Sanderud, K ., aamous NTetulasia of the Respiratory Tract Epithelium . An

Autons Stud~y of 21/~ Cases . . a oriT'o`To~iacco '~moT cua "
.. .~~~ on,and
~
~,es ~de ce BCA ~'
107 . Sanderud, K., uamous bista le sia of the Re s irator Tra ct Foitheliu~~a.
An Autopsv Stud of 214 Cases . , . e a on o"'TTseas~"e:"°'~'~le PtT~L:
OBIO WS .,
108 . Shin,ikin, td. B ., Pulmonar T ors in Exôerimental Animals . ADiI. C :1CER

R='SE~IRCH, I, 223-26? (1955) .
109 . Spain, D . t•i., The Distinction Between Re eneration and Atyaical Alterations
. ip he Bronchia lMucosa . ANf. REV. TDffaC . , 7, 5''1- ?09 .
110 . Szolomajer, J ., Mor holo ic31 Chanaes in the Tracheobronchial :•iucosa of

Residents of Cincinnati and va.rons . n: CTO OF SCIMCE DISS ., V•dIMMSITY
OF CIi•TCIPIi'Te1T , , 04 pp .
111 . Teague, C . E ., Si :rv v of Cancer Research with Emphasis uaon Possible

Csrcino ens from Tobacco . SPECIAL REPORT, FEB . 2 .
112 . Tremer, H . 2•I., Falk, . H. L ., and Kotin, P ., Efc .Air Pollutants on Cili-
ated Mucus-secretin Enitheliu .*n. J. NATL . CA?TCER I'TST ., a, 9-9 : 1cn9 .
113 . Van Duuren, B . L ., 3ilbao, J . A ., and Joseph, C . A ., Tho Carcino enic

Nitro•en Heteroc clics in Ciaarette-Smoke Condensate . J. NbTL . CH~.
I ~ :, ;~~
114 . Walker, W. E ., Phosrimtric Deter.mination o R Polyn 1'egrA=oic
iivCrocarbons . MR, I``?bl, 's•to.~~(qj .t'? . 2'7).
115 . '.leller, Z . W . , M°tanla sis of Bronchial Epitheliira

+.. .....~r (A. POst- :iortel"Al Stud ) .
.,, .... . . .,r. - . . . . ...r«..., .. ..+ ..r.....,. ... ..~..
:,:d. J . CLT.•' . PA!.? 2i, 7,~~=~l77.
116 . :Iynder, 73 . L ., L•aborntor• I COn~:r

~ 'i
y bL̀ltion t o _ t ~Re T~o.- bacco-~.~iaacer ~"ob: .il .
1'~Vl .~ ' . ^JLT~ . '.:C~~ it.~ .
/,p'1' , 17~ .~t-lU 1 ;~l~i~/v`/
f Nq
117 . Wynder, E . L ., Bross, I . J ., Cornfield, J ., and 0'Donnell, W . E ., ;!Ms

Cancer in Women : A Stud of Environr~ental Factors . 1dEW ENG .
0
255,, 1111-1121 1 .
118 . 4ionder, E . L ., Ferrari, E ., and Frrti, E ., Lung Cancer in Venice . An-

Evidemiolo ical Stud . LIITCLT, 1961 (ii), 1347-13 9 .
.
119 . Wynder, E . L ., and Hoffmann,. .DStudies with the Gaseous a nd Particul,,ite
Pha se of Toba
.... ~. cco Smoke . PROC . Ai 1. A ., . CI` rI. MT,ti . C, W, 373
U '2-.
120 . Wynder, E . L ., and Lemon, F . R ., and Bross, I. J., Cancer~and Coronary

Arter Disea se 9monrz Seventh . L1a-v Adventistr .
121 . Yamagiwa, K ., and Ichikawa, K ., Uber die Kunstliche Erzeumng von

II . - .,
ll ~ ~ a„I/,fJY
,
' Author : Alan Rodgman
Division : Chemical Research Notebook pages : none

1 q6 3
r
RDM, 1962, No . V Previous Reports :
t RDI4, 1954) No. 31
No . of pages : RDM, 1955 , No . ]3
t RDK, 1956, No . 10
RDR, 1959, No . 1
TIZ SMOKa1G A_IiEALTH_ PBOBLEM,--

.. CRITICAL
A AND OBJECTIVE
_....-.. .. ...... .~..~......APPRAISAL
... ...~.......
The cigarette smoke-health problem is discussed, and it is related to
the potential involvement of the members of the Company's Research Department .
Special emphasis is placed on the lung cancer problem . Arguments by those
claiming cigarette smoke as a health hazard are prese~tedp as well as the

i
oounter-arguments of those not in accord with such views . The weight of the arguments
and counter-arguments is discus ed . An attempt has been made to present the
o arguments objectively . the rguments,
are 4iade .
v
u
several recommendations
This memorandum presents my position as briefly and as concisely as possible .
Id a companion memorandum with V& identical schematic organization, the same
thoughts are presented in more detail . If requested, a thorough, fully documented
exposition of the ideas will be prepared .
=fORANDUI~ u,
. . N
Alt0ough the major part of the sales of this Company consists of cigarettes, N
m
what the Company As se,i}V se113" is arette smoke . This Company, therafore, Ln
should be posfty concerned with the physiological ppperties and composition of N
cigarette smoke . The benefits antbio* from such '.cr.owledg3 are obvious, particularly
if it anticipates possible future governmental regulation . During16 past two decades,
cipgarette smoke has been it :1e target of a host of studies relating it to ill nealth
i I and particularly to lung cancer . The majority of these studies incriminate cigarette
smoke from a health viewpoint .

-2-
_I. The Evidence - Pro and Con
The cigarette smoke-lung cancer problem has been investigated
epidemiologically, pathologically, biologically, and chemically .
Each discipline has yielded pertinent information .
L- NP1d44o1oZiaa1 Rata_ •
~ The results of 34 different statistical studies show that cigarette
smoking increases the risk of developIng lung cancer . Mbny authorities
,;; :_believe the relationship to be one of cause-and-effect,
Contradictory data have been provided by limited statistical studies
which suggest that cigarette smoking is linked to a constitutional factor .
The results of these studies can, however, account for only a small
fraction of the difference in lung cancer incidence observed between
smokers and nonsmokers .
The statistical data from the smoking-health studies are almost
universally accepted . After more than ten years, criticisms of the studies
have been reduced to the dictum A st~at~istioal sjW,y ctannol „nrove a c~gsQ ;
and-ef o,C rel,ationsl•Ip~b_2tXeen two factors .
k. _Patho_lggi_cLl. Dg,tL
qIt has been observed that cigarette smokers' lungs show profound cellular
changes which are proportional to cigarette consumption, that fluorescent
const3ituents of cigarette smoke are absorbed into respiratory tract cells
(although fluorescence dnd . :cercinogenicity are not synonymous), that cigarette
smoke and some of its constituents cause ciliary paralysis, and that
cigarette smoke collects in the lungs at cilia-free areas and at areas
with paralyzed cilia . cn

~
~
N
• m
Contradictory evidence indicates that the above-described cellular
changes can be caused by respiratory diseases and other illnesses, that
these changes occur to a degree in infants, in nonsmokers, in the windpipes
of smokers (although cancer of the windpipe is rare), and in residents of
areas of extreme air pollution, and that ciliary paral,ysis can be caused by
air po].hutants like industrial and automobile exhaust gases . Also it is
not known whether such changed cells ever become cancerous .
These findings may be summarized as follows : Si1ce cellular changes in
ttM Vtst.<=ar_J f L il Y r_a M. a f or"th_e t ff~n &M re_t
s si s occur in m s' 1 s a the ncer• ee
3LU U ee 7iV a $an t-i 0 !liOA".LO ether_ theae _ch lungm d
re k ot_th a_c_tor__to be
blamga , in lung, q,ancer caqs_ation .
_c. P.i412g&CL1.Pg.tL
Cigarette smoke condensate is carcinogenic to mouse skin . Mch is made of
the fact that the dosage level used exceeds that of the human exposure . Other
investigators, using nominal dsage levels, did not obtain positive results .
Some interpret this as an indication that cigarette smoke is not carcinogenic .
It should be noted, however, that many attempts were made to induce cancer i~z
animals with .coal tar prior to the first success with unrealistic dosages .
Inhalation studies with cigarette smoke have yielded an increased incidence
of adenomas in adenoma-susceptible mouse strains . No hAman-type carcinomas have
been produced although the previously mentioned cellular changes and bronchitic
conditions have .
These findings are interproted by sone as an indication that cigarette
smoke is not carcinogenic to human lung tissue . Two facts offset such thinking . Ln
~
J
Fir,st, mice are not men, hence carcinomas should not be expected in a host ~
m
Ln
m
~
~
resistant to the #nduction of carcinoma of the lung and whose usual lung
cancer is the adenoma . Secondly, the ratio, lung cancer deathsstotal cigarette
smokers in the United Statds, is approximately 1 :1700, hence an inhalation
experiment would require about 1700 mice for the production of one lung caroinoma,
assuming the response of mousd and human lung tissue was the same . The biological
dindings are often dismissed with the statements Dfice are not men and bfoM
4413,1g,,no hji.man lung tisr,sue.
.4• 2hjnjc"&'tL
Cigarette smoke contains at least 17 compounds carcinogenic to mouse skin .
Cigarette smoke also contains promoting (or cocaroinogenic) agents . These findings,
at first impugned, are now accepted but dismissed as unimpoe3tant because none of
the compounds has been shown iZ X&M to be carcinogenic or cocaroinogenio to
human lung tissue . It is unlikely that such experiments will ever be carried out .
e_ . Thg XvIdgnge to_ D_ate_

Obviously, the amount of evidenoe accumulated to indict cigarette smoke as
a health hazard is overwhelming . The evidence challenging this indictment is scant .
Attempts to shift the blame to Ither faotors, e .g., air pollutants, necessitates
acceptance of data similar to those denied in the cigarette smoke case .
IIt Igtgruret_ ;Ltjqpy of the Evidence

After reviewing this evidenoe, goversmental health agencies and medical Ln
societies throug9 world have concluded that a cause-and-effect relationship G
e.-dsts between cigarette smoke and lung cancer . It is predicted that the recently m
J
appointed Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Smokinp and Health will reach the "'
same conclusion.
It has been repeatedly stated that some scientists discount the cigarette smoke-
lung cancer theory . This is true . But it should be noted that many of those quoted in
this regard are on record with contra\ np views, e .g ., Berkson,the statistician, has sqc
stated " . . .t:Ze definitive important finding of th3se statistical studies is not that
tiier3 is an a3sociation between smo :cing and lua?, cancer, but that there is an
association between amoking and deaths from all causes generally . . . . .", and Kotin, '
member of the Scientific Advisory Board, TIRC, stated "The statemeiti . . .to the effect
that 'The sum total of scientific evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that
cigarette smoke is a causal factor in the rapid]y increasing incidence of human
epidermoid cancer of the lung' represents a view with which we concur .~
M. The T_, b,g,_aaco Indus_t_,ry, !s Cont ibu ion
To investigate the tobacco smoke-health situation the Tobacco Industry has given
about five million dollars to TIftC since 1954 for research . According to Little, its
Scientific Director ., the puppose of TIRC is " . . .to encourage and support qualified
research scientists in their efforts to learn more about these complex problems ~Cancer
and heart disease .'' Through December 1961, TIRC grantees published 197 papers ; 36
on the chemistry of tobacco an~tLts smoke, 47 on cancer research, 13 on human lung
studies, 78 on heart and circulation studies, 4 on gastrointestinal tra ct studies,
5 on psycho-physiolo4ol studies, and 14 miscella neous studies (lung cancer reviews,
tobacco-health textbook) .
I believe that much ofi^this research, particularly that on the chemical, biochemica]
and biological study of tobacco and its smoke, could have and should have been carried
out in the research departments of the tobacco companies . The members of this Company's
Research Department are as qualified, as ob3ective, and g,s_ Inter~ _e tqd in learning " . .~
more about these complex problems . . . . .'as scientists not employed by a tobacco manufac-
no
turer . Any findings made byt us could'iave any more adverse effect on the Tobacco Industry~
than those reported by TIRC grantees~~

.
This Company is studying in detail the composition of cigarette smoke, but much
data remain unptblished because they are concerned with carcinogenic or cocarcinogenic
compounds or with patentable material . This raises an
cn
P.
~
~
m
Ln
m
~
m
interesting question about the former yioNqUO compoundsS If ab0tom company
plead "Not guilty" or Not proven" to the charge that dig,•rette smoke (or one of
its constituents) is a~~ factor in the causation of lung cancer or
some other disease, can the company justifiably take the position that publication
of data pertaining to cigar.ette smoke composition or properties should be
withheld because such data might affect adversely the company's economic status
when the company has already implW in its plea that no such etiologic effect
extsts?
It ls not my intent to suggest that this Company accept the cigarette smoke-
KV--.
health data at face value, but I do auggest that active participate
in cigarette smoke-health studies .
B . RECOP MNIDAT IONS
10
After consideration of the evidence available on the cigarette smoke health
problem and the Company's obligotion to its customers, stockholders, and •employees,
i
it is recommended that :
1. Facilities, animals, and personnel (where necessary) be a•cquired *s soon as
t possible to study biologically cigarette smoke, tobacco, and tobacco additives .
Data from such stddies ma y be invaluable if gover an ~ 1 restrictions are
imposed as a result of the conclusions of the Surgeon 14eneral's Advisory

Ln
Committee on Smoking and Health .. N
~
~
2 . W14- ~ata ahm..ig available 6n cigarette smoke constituents with adverse m
~
m
physiological effects be published . ~
~
3 . Data on analyt.ical pnocedues concerning such constituents be published .
4 . The Compan7's supervisory personnel be provided with reports like the
Royal College of Physicians' 4_mwoft Smoking and He9lth and the AnauAl Renort
of the Scientific Director (TIs1C) just as they were provided with Science
Looi:s at -mokina 0?orthruv),

. ._._ and iiealth pamphlets, anr:.
Tobacoo
"favorable" articles from tI~ .
5 . This Company's management recognize that many members of its Research
Department are intensely concerned about the cigarette smoke-health problem and eager to rarticipate in h4m study and solution
!
• January 10, 1963
Mr. Kenneth H . Hoover
Re: RDM, 1963, No . 1 and RDM, 1963, No . 4
It is my understanding that if I sign and
approve these reports I am subscribing to gl] of the
opinions, conclusions, recommendations, and the like contained
therein . I believe that these reports are factually
correct, and I agree, in general, with the interpretations and
conclusions presented . I-further believe that these_
reports are useful and timely, and should be allowed
to see the light of day . I do not, however, agree
fully with all of the statements, particularly certain
of the recommendations, made therein, and on this basis
probably should not "approve" these reports under the
• existing definition of "approval ."

The health question has no easy answer and
generates many points of view . It would be remarkable
indeed, if my views on this complex and controversial
question coincided exactly with those of Dr . Rodgman.
I believe he has a right to be heard despite my
honest disagreement with him on certain minor points .
Accordingly, I recommend that the reports be accepted
and distributed . I might also suggest that copies
be made available to members of our Legal Department .
C.E. Teague, Jr.

. : .•y
_"'~
. Yr1
JAN~rwety ..•n . . . ~c .c-
~+
,;• X,
~..~._~n^~ ~ . ..
, . •t .. ~ .~
~-- ~„ .A .W o jL&. ..v.:w .. ~rs M tA ., ,% r +1 L ~,;~
.YJ LLal.L k, . -:
e;Cdtl1
!s
~...._ /?~. .~ t.Liu
~• a .4
1 r•
.Ta .A
. . f""Z-L r
- t , :.~.r f.K++v .t>A•SIb

_. • l,.C t_ .G r~~ L I1d(iA !/m~Q I mRSa_ 7i.Z.ic+t <Nj"-j f++t•i*
44-
/T._ . .+~.t~
k,- tt t •.:. e. 't
~ tNtJiA .jZ_•~_. r%L •= V 1 ard
.••
.I~IL~ Sr~7++r . .~_
L.iA'~tl~ r74 ...IOG~f/... . . V . <<wr~a pM• }i'~{A+t GO ~~pJy~ .
• , ' ( l
w% t9•c. /)c: .n. :'3.
R" L~•,G1L14~~CrC~ ~ dL•~C v~'NI~~ :N? I h/} : Cn rs ~.~ A c ~..

. I
e+~...~.
.~~ j% •fL4. .•%..a. L,,•.'.)t . -4 .. . _^lw t v., Lw ., . I c, .., c tr,,,~, CIA . ; ..
r,
L : :o_ : r.lan Rodg:::an February 12, 196 4
Divisio :.: Chemical Research Aotebool: pages :

See Appendix I
RDR, 1964, No . 1 0 Previous reports :

See Appendix I I
No . of Pages : 70
THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDE' XSATE . MV .

A SUMMARY OF AN EIGHT-YEAR STUDY
OBJECT :
To summarize without experiment detail the results of a study of ciga-

rette smoke conducted in this laboratory from August 1955 to date .
SUMMARY :
During the past .eight years an intensive investigation in our laboratory

on the composition of cigarette smoke from various tobacco types and blends
has permitted identification of many compounds and classes of compounds .
These include the following :
1 . Saturated hydrocarbon fraction
Very little work was done on this fraction in our study since this
material had been investigated extensively by others . This fraction
was isolated from thecigarette smoke of a11•types and blends of
tobacco studied .
2 . Phytadienes and neophytadien e
Neophytadiene was identified unequivocally as the majc .:- phytadiene

in the cigarette smoke :--om WINSTON blend, CAMEL bler._, Turkish
blend, flue-cured and i. .•.ley tobacc . The remainder of the
phytadiene fraction, also present i . =he smoke from these tobacco
types and blends, consisted of at least three and possibly a s
many as 12 phytadienes .
3 . Squalene and isosqualenes
The squalene-isosqualene fraction isolated from WINSTON blend

tobacco smoke consisted of at least two, and possibly three isomeric
hydrocarbons .
4 . Solanesene t
The exper : .:ental data indicated the presence of'at least two
solanesenes . These were present in th . smoke from WINSTON blend,
Turkish blend, flue-cured and burley zobaccos .
:. . Polycyclic arosatic hydrocarbons
To date, 43 polycyclic hydrocarbons have been identified in kI.;STON

cigarette smoke . 0! these, 14 iaere '__~antified unequivocally . Those
were as follows : naphthalene, 1-methylnaphthalene, 2-mcthylnaphthele .^.e,
acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, fluorene, pizenanthrene, anthracena,
pyrene, fluoranthene, benz[a)anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene),
benzo[a)py~ene (3,4-benzpyrene), and dibenz[a,h)anthracene (1,2,5,6-
dibenzanthracene) . The remaining 29 hydrocarbons were identified
solely on the basis of ultraviolet absorption data . Included were
the following : 1-methyl-3,4-dihydronaphthalene, 2-phenylnaphthalene,
9-methylanthracene, 9-methylphenanthrene, 1-methylpyTMene (3-methyl-
pyrene), 2-methylpyrene (4-methylpyrene), 4-methylpyrene (1-methyl-
pyrene), 3-methylbenz[a]anthracene (3-methyl-l,2-benzanthracene),
benzo[ghiJfluoranthene, benzo[j]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene,
benzo[c]phenanthrene (3,4-benzphenanthrene), perylene, benzo[e]pyrene
(1,2-ben .-yrene), benzo[jh_i]perylene (1,12-benzperylene), cholanthrene,
naphtho[2,3-e)pyrene (2!,3'-naphtho-l,2-pyrene), naphtho[2,3-a]pyrene
(2',3'-napht,ho-3,4-pyrene), dibenzo[a,l)pyrene (1,2,3,4-dibenzpyrene),
dibenzo[a,h]pyrene (3,4,8,9-dibenzpyrene), dibenzo[a,i]pyrene (3,4,9,10-
dibenzpyrene), dibenzo[df, mno]chrysene (anthanthrene), coronene,
2,3-dihydro-1_A-benzoja)pent[h]anthracene (5,6-cyclopenteno-l,2-
benzanthracene), 10,11-dihydro-9_H-benzo[a]cyclopent[i)anthracene
(6,7-cyclopenteno-l,2-benzanthracene), dimethylphenanthrenes, methyl-
fluoranthene, methylchrysene, and a methylbenzo[a]pyrene (methyl-3,4-
benzpyrene) .
In a limited study of CAMEL cigarette smoke, the following 12 polycyclic

hydrocarbons were identified : naphthalene, phenanthrene, anthracene, pyrene,
1-methylpyrene (3-methylpyrene), fluoranthene, acenaphthylene, benzo[a)pyrene
(3,4-benzpyrene), benz[a]anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene), benzo[~lperylene
(1,12-benzperylene), anthanthrene, and dibenzo[a,h]pyrene (3,4,8,9-dibenzpyrene) .
Of these 12, five were identified unequivocally - naphthalene, anthracene,
pyrene, fluoranthene, and benzo[a]pyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) .
It has also been demonstrated that the cigarette smoke from Turkish blend,
WINSTON- and CAMEL-type flue-cured, WINSTON-type . . .ri2v, SALEM blend, Kent
blend, Parliament blend, Lark blend, and G-7X tobaccos contain the following
five polycyclic hydrocarbons : anthraeene, pyrene, fluoranthene, chrysene,
and benzo[,g]pyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) . It is highly probable that all of the
polycyclic hydrocarbons isolated from WINTSTON cigarette smoke could be found
in the smoke from any tobacco type or blend.
The effect of various factors on the polycyclic hydrocarbon content of

tobacco smoke was studied . Such factors as (a) the use of additives on the
tobacco, theèigarette paper or the filter tip material, (b) more efficient
filter tip materials, (c) the use of porous cigarette papers, (d) the use of
tobacco ieaf selected from specific areas of the plar.i ., and (e) solvent
extraction of the tobacco prior to smoking produced a reduction in the `n ~
polycyclic hydrocarbon content of the tobacco smoke . ~
m
Ln
m
OD
N
At least three of the precursors in tobacco of the polycyclic hydro-
carbons in the smoke,have been defined . These were as follows : the
phytosterols, e .g ., 15-sitosterol ; :the terpenes, e .g ., solanesol ; and the
saturated hydrocarbon fraction .
6 . Aliphatic ester fraction
Degradation of an aliphatic ester fraction isolated from the

smoke of WINSTON blend and Turkish blend tobaccos yielded 16
normal long-chained primary alcohols ranging from dodecyl
alcohol to 1-heptacosanol, inclusive, and 17 known acids
ranging from myristic to octacosanoic acid, inclusive, plus
oleic and linolenic acid . Thus, the ester fraction could con-
ceivably consist of a total of 272 different esters . This ester
fraction was similar to that isolated from extracts of .flue-cured,
burley, and Turkish blend tobaccos .
7 . Solanesyl esters
Degradation of a solanesyl ester fraction yielded solanesol and

five known long-chained aliphatic acids indicating that the
solanesyl ester fraction consisted of at least five different
solanesyl esters . This fraction was present in WINSTON blend,
Turkish blend, flue-cured, and burley tobacco smoke . Solanesyl
acetate has been identified in the smoke of WINSTON blend, Turkish,
f lue-cured, and burley tobaccos .
6 . Phytosteryl ester fraction

•
Degradation of a phytosteryl ester fraction yielded stigmasterol
and 13-sitosterol plus six known long-chained aliphatic acids .
Thus, the phytosteryl ester fraction could consist of as many as
12 different phytosteryl esters or as few as six . This fraction
was .present in WINSTON blend, Turkish blend, flue-cured, and
burley tobacco smoke .
9 . Lactones
Turkish tobacco smoke has yielded the lactones sclareolide,

cx- and p-levantenolide . ;
10 . Alcohols and Hydroxyethers
The following alcohols from the tobacco smokes indicated have been
identified unequivocally ; solanesol (WINS=Z blend, CAMEL blend,
Turkish, f lue-cured, burley) ; stigmasterol .:nd A-sitosterol
(WINSTON blend, CAMEL blend, Turkish, flue-cured, burley) ;
12cX-hydroxy-13-epimanoyl oxide (Turkish) ; and phytol (Turkish) .
4
WINSTON blend tobacco smoke has also yielded a normal, long-

chained, primary alcohol fraction containing eight alcohols,
1-heptadecanol to 1-tetracosanol, ir.clusive .
Turkish tobacco smoke has yielded an isoprenoid alcohol fraction

containing phytol and other acyclic unsaturated isoprenoid
alcohols in the C15, CIO, C25 and C30 series . Also isolated were
the macrocyclic hydroxyethers, cx-5,8-oxido-3,9(17),13-duvatrien-l-ol
and Cx-5,8-oxido-3,9,13-duvatrien-l-ol .
11 . Phenols
The follow~ng phenols from tobacco smoke have been characterized :

CX-tocopherctl (WINSTON blend, Turkish, flue-cured, burley) ; phenol,
o- and p-ckesol (WINSTON blend, CAMEL b lend, SALEM blend, Turkish,
flue-cured ; burley, G-7X) ; hydroquinone, 1-naphthol, eugenol, and
isoeugenol (Turkish) .
It was also shown that the amount of phenols in tobacco smoke

exceeded that in the tobacco smoked . An attempt to define the
precursors in tobacco of the simple phenols in tobacco smoke,
e .g ., phenol, o-, m-, and g-cresol, indicated that these pre-
cursors are not extractable from tobacco by the most efficient
tobacco extractant, methanol . Pyrolysis studies indicated that
the known major tobacco constituents, cellulose, pectin, lignin,
and glucose plus fructose (as invert sugar),*yield phenol and
p-cresol on pyrolysis . Similar studies indicated that various
tobacco types, under controlled pyrolytic conditions, also yield
phenol and P-cresol .
12 . Aldehydes and Ketones
CAMEL cigarette smoke has yielded the following aldehydes and

ketones : acetaldehyde, acetone, propionaldehyde, 2-furaldehyde,
glyoxal, pyruvaldehyde, 2,3-butanedione, 3-heptanone, and 2,3-
pentanedione .
13 . Heterocyclic Nitrogen Compounds
Turkish tobacco smoke has yielded the following heterocyclic

nitrogen compounds : pyrocoll, indole, 3-methylindole (skatole),
dimethylindoles, trimethylindoles, carbazole, and methylcarbazoles .
14 . Miscellaneous compounds
The following miscellaneous compounds from tobacco smoke have been

characterized : 6-acetyl-2,3,4-tris-d-p-methylvaleryl-S-D-gluco-
pyranoside (Turkish) ; furan (CAMEL blend) ; benzene (CAMEL blend) ;
and the 4-(2-butenylidene)-isophorones (Turkish) .
5
^ ~ :LE OF CO\TENTS
Pafie
OBJ :.CT . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SU*L 1AP.Y . . . . . . ., _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
I . Hydrocarbons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
a . Aliphatic Hydrocarbons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Saturared Hydrocar.bon Fraction . . . . . . . 10
2 . Phytadienes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , 10
3 . Squalene and Isosqualenes . . . . . . . . . . 12
4. Solanesenes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
b . Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons . . . . . . . . . 14
1 . Isolation of Polycyclic Hydrocarbons from

Cigarette Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 . Reduction of the Amount of Polycyclic Hydro-

carbons in Cigarette Smoke . . . . . . . . . 22
i . By Use of More Effective Filtering

Agents (15) . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 22
ii . By Use of Porous or Aluminized

Paper (15, 18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
iii . By Addition of Certain Compounds to

the Tobacco, to the Filter Tip Material,
or to the Cigarette Paper (15, 18, 19,
22, 29, 30) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
iv, By Choice of Tobacco Leaves (15) . . . . 22
v . By Solvent Extraction of Tobacco

(12, 13, 15) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 . Precursors of Polycyclic Hydrocarbons . . . . 34
II . Esters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
a. Aliphatic Ester Fraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
b. Solanesyl Esters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
1 . Solanesyl Acetate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2 . Solanesy2 Ester Fraction . . , , . . . . , . 40

_ . :~? CC : ;_:;`;TS (Cont` d)
?a e
c . Phytosteryl Ester Fraction . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
d . 6-Acety 1-2, 3, 4-tr :.s-_d-A-methylvaleryl=

p-D-glucopyranoside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
III . Lactones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
a. Sclareolide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
a- and A-Levantenolide : . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
IV . Alcohols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
a . Solanesol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
b . Normal Long-chained Primary Alcohols . . . . . . . 43
c . Phytosterols . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
'd . 12cx-Hydroxy-l3-epimanoyl Oxide . . . . . . . . . . 44
e . Unsaturated Acyclic Isoprenoid Alcohols . . . . . 44
f . Macrocyclic Hydroxyethers . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
V. Pheno l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
a . Isolation of Phenols from Cigarette Smoke . . . . 46
1. cx-Tocopherol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2. Eugenol and Isoeugenol . . . . . . . . . . . 46
3 . Other Phenols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
. Analysis for Phenols in Cigarette Smoke . . . . . 47
c . Precursors in Tobacco of Phenols in Tobacco

Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
VI. Acids . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
VII . Aldehydes and Ketones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
VIII . Heterocyclic Nitrogen Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
, IX . Miscellaneous Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
X . Comparison of Different Tobacco Types . . . . . . . . . 52
XI . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .~. . . . . . . . . . . . 54
B . E};PERIMEhTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7 „
TA.Bi.E OF CONTENTS (Cont' d)

Pafie
C. DISCUSSIO,\` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6
D . CO\CLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . 61
E. RECOP^WN'AATIO\S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2
I. Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
II . Patentability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
APPE\'D?X I - Notebook Pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
APPENDIX II - Previous Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
0
;._S^ 0 :' :r, :LES
Table No . Ti .le Paae
I Polycyclic Hydrocarbons in Cigarette

Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
II Filter Tip Materials : Effect or. Nicotine,

Total Solids, Tota~ Polycyclic Hydrocarbons
and Benzo[a]pyrene in WINSTON Blend
Tobacco2 Smoke (15) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
III Effect of Porous or Aluminized Paper on

Nicotine, Total Solids, and Total Polycyclic
Hydrocarbons in WINSTON Blend Tobacc lo
Smoke (18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
IV Effect of Additives to the Tobacco, to the

Paper, and to the Filter Tip Materials on
Nicotine, Total Solids, Total Polycyclic
Hydrocarbons, and Benzo(a]pyrenel in
Cigarette Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
V Position of Leaf on Stalk : Effect on Fats

and Waxes, Flavorants, and Nicotine in
Tobacco and on Nicotine, Total Solids,
Total Polycyclfc Hydrocarbons, and2
Benzo[a]pyrene in Cigarette Smoke (15) . . 9
VI Solvent Pretreatment of Individual Tobacco

Types and Tobacco Blends : Effect on Total
Polycyclic Hydrocarbons and Benzo(a]pyrenel
in Cigarette Smoke (12, 13, 15) . . . . . . 1
VII Effect of Tobacco Constituents and Other

Orgsr.ic Compounds on the Total Polycyclic
Hydrocarbons and Benzo[a]pyrenel in
Cigarette Smoke (22) . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
VIII Known Constituents Obtained by Degradation

of Aliphatic Ester Fraction (LXVIII) from
Tobacco Smoke (45-47) . . . . . . . . . . . 39
IX Known Constituents Obtained by Degradation

of Solanesyl Ester Fraction (LXXTC) from
Tobacco Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Known Constituents Obtained by Degradation ~

of Phytosteryl Ester Fraction from Tobacco _,
Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 ~
6
Ln
XI Phenol Content of Cigarette Smoke from m
Various Tobacco Types, Tobacco Blends, co
co
and Cellulose (32) . . . : . . . . . . . . . 8
XII Pyrolysis of Tobacco and Tobacco

Constituents : Phenol Content of
Pyrolysate (50) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
LIST OF TArL ~S (Cor.t' d)
Table No . Title Paee
}:III Conroarison of the Smoke Condensates

from Different Tobacco Types . . . . . . . . 53
0
10
:~ . T' ;i:07L'CÎOiy
At present, the R . J . Reynolds Tobacco Cr. . .pany is recognized as the

ioading company in the Tobacco Industry of the United States . The Company's
s ::olcin ; products constitute over one-third of those sold througnout this
country . Since the major part of the domestic sales of this Company consists
o .: smoking products, e .g ., cigarettes and pipe tobacco, it should be reme :r.bered
that the customer's main interest is not in the cigarettes and/or pipe tobacco
Der se but in the smoke derived therefrom . For this reason alone, the recog-
r.ized sales'leader of the Tobacco Industry should also be the recognized
leader of the Tobacco Industry in its contribution to scientific knowledge
concerning the composition of tobacco smoke .
Tobacco smoke is a mixture whose precise composition has never been

defined . During the past eight years, we have conducted an intensive investi-
gation of the composition of tobacco smoke - particularly cigarette smoke .
The results of this study of cigarette smoke together with the pertinent
experimental data have appeared in a series of Research Department reports
and memoranda dating from 1955 to the present . In addition, selected portions
of these results have been published from this Research Department . The present
report will summarize for ready reference, omitting the experimental detail,
the results presented in the various publications, reports and memoranda .
References pertinent to each topic will be found in the original reports,
publications, and memoranda .
The following sections describe briefly the various compounds or series

of compounds isolated and/or identified in our study of cigarette smoke :
I . Hydrocarbons
a._ Al.jphatic Hydrocarbons
1 . SATURATED HYDROCARBON FRACTION
A saturated hydrocarbon fraction, m .p . 62 .5-64 .5°, was isolated

from the smoke of cigarettes fabricated from flue-cured, Turkish,
burley or blended tobaccos (16, 17, 48-50) . Presumably, this
fraction was similar to that represented by I (n L 20 to 34) and
II (n - 17 to 30) .
u,
CH3(CH2)nCH3 ~3(~2)n~(~3)2 ~
N
m
II cn
m
2 . PHYTADIENES
A series of phytadienes consisting of hydrocarbons with molecular

formula C20H38 and whose structures may be represented by III, IV, V,
11
-and VI was identified as constituents of cigarette smoke (16, 17) .

Only neophytadiene (III, n - 3),
•
11~'`
H[CH2CH(C'H3)CH2CH2]nCH2CCH=CH[CH2CH(CH3)CH2CH2]3-nH
III
H[ CH2CH( CH3) CH2CH2] nCH-C(CH3) CH-CH[ CH2CH ;(CH3) CH2CH2 ] 3-nH
H[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2 ]mCH2CH(CH3) CH2CfiaCHCH(CH3) _CHCH2[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2CH2] 2-mH
V
fIH2
H[CH2CH(CH3)CH2CH2]mCH2CH(CH3)CH2CH=CHCCH2CH2[CH2CH(
VI
the most polar phytadiene, could be isolated in pure form from

this series . Neophytadiene was the major component of the phyta-
diene fraction . The presence in cigarette smoke of at least one
representative of each of the structures III, IV, V, and VI was
demonstrated by the reaction sequence shown below . This involved
the Diels-Alder reaction of the phytadiene fraction :or subfraction
with 1,4-naphthoquinone (VII), air oxidation of the adducts (VIII,
IX, X, XI), followed by oxidation of the resulting mono- (XII),
di- (XIII, XIV), or trialkyl substituted anthraquinone (XV) to
the correspondingly substituted anthraquinone mono- (XVI), di-
(XVII, XVIII), or tricarboxylic acid (XIX) . Anthraquinone-2-
carboxylic (XVI), 1,2-dicarboxylic (XVII),
Na2cr2o~ .
III (n = 3)
000 02
112504 ~
VIII XII XVI
IV = 3) R 1iN03
02 _ -------y i
XIII XVII
OQ 0
III (n = 0, 1 and/or 2)` 02
VII I
VI (m = 0, 1 and/or 2)
I
x XIV XVIII
C0011
R 02
~)
11NU 3 `
C- il
If ~( ()U( I
X]}:
Z60S 0t Lti5 xi XV
12
1,3-dicarboxylic (XVIII), and 1,2,4-tricarboxylic (XIX) acids were

obtained .
.
No evidence was obtained for the phytadienes XX (m = 0,1,2)
and XXI (m @ 0,1,2) since these will not yield anthraquinone-
carboxylic acids in the reaction sequence shown .
H[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2 CH(CH3) CH-CiiCH=C(CH3) CH2CH2[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2CH'2l2_mH
H[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2CH2]mCH2C(CH3) sCHCH-CHCH(CH3) CH2CH2[ CH2CH(CH3) CH2CH2 ]2-mH
XXI
Discounting the optical isomers and the ais, trans, cis-cis,

.trans-trans, cis-trans, and trans-cis isomers, nineteen phytadienes
are possible . It should be noted that III (n - 0) and IV (n s 0)
are identical .
The evidence indicated that at least four of the isomeric 0

phytadienes were present in cigarette smoke . These were as
follows : neophytadiene (III, n- 3) ; 3,7,11,15-tetramethyl-1,3-
hexadecadiene (IV, n - 3) ; 2,6,10,14-tetramethyl-1,3-hexadecadiene
(III, n - 0 or IV, n - 0) ; and a 1,2,4-trialkyl-l,3-butadiene . As
many as thirteen of the nineteen isomers may be present ; namely,
III (n - 0,1,2,3), IV (n - 1,2,3), V (m - 0,1,2) and VI (m - 0,1,2) .
The phytadienes, other than neophytadiene (III, n - 3), are present
in the smoke condensate in relatively small quantities compared to
the amount of neophytadiene .
The phytadiene series was obtained from the cigarette smoke

condensate from Turkish, flue-cured, and burley tobaccos and from
several different commercial blends of tobacco (WINSTON, CAMEL,
SALEM, Kent, Parliament) (16, 17, 48-50) .
Ln
3 . SQUALENE AND ISOSQUALENES
~
A series of hydrocarbons, C30H50, consisting of squalene m
(XXII) and isosqualenes, presumably XXIII and XXIV, was isolated ~„
from WINSTON cigarette smoke (53=55) . . The amount of squalenes ~
in the smoke was 2 .4 mg . per 1000 cigarettes . w
13
H[ CH`,C(CH3)=C'dCHi ] 3[ CH,)CHaC(CH3) C~:2] 3H
}OaI
CH2-C ( CH3) C'd2 CH2 [ CH2C (CH3) -CHCH2 ] 2[ CH2 CHaC ( CH3) CH2 ]
XXIII
CH2=C(CH3)CH2CH2[CH2C(CH3)=CHCH2]2[CH2CH=C(CH3)CH2]2CH2CH2C(CH3)=CH2
XXIV
Treatment of this fraction with hydrogen chloride yielded a sample

of squalene hexahydrochloride which was identical with an authentic
sample prepared from squalene . '
4 . SOLANESENES
A series of solanesenes, C45H72, the major portion of which

appeared to consist of XXV and XVI, was isolated from WINSTON
cigarette smoke (53-55) . .
~2
H[CH2C(CH3)=CHCH2]8CH2CCHgCH2
XXV
H[CH2C(CH3)-CHCH2jgCH-C(CH3)C=CH2
XXVI
Similar series of hydrocarbons were obtained by the dehy-

dration of solanesol (XXVII) at 70° using potassium hydrogen
sulfate and by the pyrolysis of solanesyl acetate (XXVIII) at
400° .
H[ CH2C(CH3)=CHCH2] 90H
XxVII
14
0
~H[CH2C(CH3)=CHCH2J90C H3
}:XVIII
Ozonization of the solanesenes obtained either from ci ;a-

:ette smoke or by dehydration of solanesol, followed by reductive
cleavage of the ozonide, yielded formaldehyde,-acetone, levulin-
aldehyde, and methylglyoxal . These cleavage products were identi-
fied as their 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazones . ,
b ._ Pol,ycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
1 . ISOLATION OF POLYCYCLIC HYDROCARBONS FROM

CIGARETTE SMOKE
Fractionation of the smoke condensate from 20,000 WINSTON

blend cigarettes permitted the identification of 43 polycyclic
hydrocarbons (28) . Of these, 14 were characterized by chemical
and physical properties in addition to ultraviolet absorption
spectra . These 14 .included the following : naphthalene (XX]X),
1-methylnaphthalene (XXX), 2-methylnaphthalene (XXXI),
acenaphthene (}IXXII), acenaphthylene (30CXIII), f luorene (XCXIV),
XXXII MIII XXXIV

pher. ::nthraze (:=,V) , anthracene (} :}:.1VY) , pyrene (:ti}:}TII) ,
C / \ \
\ ~ / /
XXxV XXXVI ??:.1VII
fluoranthene (XXXVIII), benz[aJanthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)

(XXXIX), chrysene (XL), benz[aJpyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) (XLI),
XXXVIII XL XLI
and dibenz(a,h)anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene) (XLII) . The

remaining 29 polycyclic hydrocarbons were identified solely on
the basis of ultraviolet absorption . These 29 included 1-methyl-
3,4-dihydronaphthalene (XLIII), 2-phenylnaphthalene (XLIV),
XLII XLIII }.ZIV
~
m
..• . .~ . ' • .fl
9thylanthracene (} :LV), 9-rwzhylpne :.anthrene (}:LVI),
CH3
XLV XLVI
1-methylpyrene (3-methylpyrene) (XLVII), 2-methylpyrene (4-

methylpyrene) (XLVIII), 4-methyipyrene (1-methylpyrene) (XLIX),
% ~% / / (
H ~' . . ~
\
XLVII XLVIII XLIX
5-methylbenz[a]anthracene (3-methyl-l,2-benzanthracene) (L),

benzo[A.h.Li]fluoranthene (LI), benzojj]fluoranthene (LII),
/ \ \
ri
\' / / C:'.
L LI LII
benzo[k]fluoranthene (LIII), benzo[c]phenanthrene (3,4-benzphen-

anthrene) (LIV), perylene (LV),
LIII LIV LV
:7
benza[ aJpyrene (1,3-aen zpyreze) (LVI), benzo[ cc : :jper}•iene (1, _2-

benzperylene) ( :.VII), cholanthrene (W-III), naphtho[2,3-e]pyrer.e
/I
/ \\
\ II
/ /
LVI LVII LVIII
(2',3'-naphtho-l,2-pyrene) (LIC), naphtho[2,3-a]pyrene (2',3'-naphtho-

3,4-pyrene) (IX), dibenzo[a,l]pyrene (1,2,3,4-dibenzpyrene) (IXI),
m
L]X LXI
dibenzo[a,]I]pyr.ene (3,4,8,9-dibenzpyrene) (IXII), dibenzo[a,i]pyrene

(3,4,9,10-dibenzpyrene) (LKIII), dibenzo[def,mno]chrysene
(anthanthrene) (IXIV) ,
// \
I
/ / ( \ /
\ \ /
LXII LXIII LXIV

is
coroner.c : =~:V), 2,3-diZydro-'_;i-banzo[_ ;cyclope .,t[h]Enthracene (5,6-

cycloper. :.a :io-1,2-benzanthraczne) (iXVI), and 10,11-dihydro-9H-
benzo[ a]cyclopent[ ijar. ;.hracene (6,7-c .•clopenteno-l,2-benzanthra- ,
cene) (LXVII) . In addition, ultraviolet spectral evidence was
I
.
I
LXV LXVI LXVII
obtained for dimethylphenanthrenes, a methylfluoranthene, methyl-

chrysene(s), and a methylbenzo[a]pyrene (methyl-3,4-benzpyrene) .
The polycyclic hydrocarbons found in our study, but not

reported elsewhere, include 1-methyl-3,4-dihydronaphthalene (XLIII),
2-phenylnaphthalene (XLIAV), cholanthrene (LVIII), and naphtho[2,3-e]-
pyrene (2',3'-naphtho-l,2-pyrene) (LIX) . Of these, cholanthrene
(LVIII) is known to be carcinogenic to mouse epidermis .
.
Fractionation of the smoke condensate from 10,500 CAMEL blend .
cigarettes permitted the identification of 12 polycyclic hydrocarbons
(11) . Of these, five were characterized by chemical and physical
properties in addition to ultraviolet absorption spectra . These
five were naphthalene (lQCIX), anthracene ()3 :XVI), pyrene (XXXVII),
fluoranthene (XXXVIII), and benzo(a]pyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) (XLI) .
The remaining seven hydrocarbons, identified solely on the basis
of ultraviolet absorption spectra included acenaphthylene (XXXIII),
phenanthrene (XXXV), 1-methylpyrene (3-methylpyrene) (XLVII),
benz[a]anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene) (XXXIX), benzo[phi]perylene
(1,12-benzperylene) (LVII), dibenzo[ def,mno] chrysene (anthanthrene)
(LXIV), and dibenzo[ a,h]pyrene (3,4,8,9-dibenzpyrene) (LXII) .
Table I lists the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons identified

in cigarette smoke to date in this laboratory and the approximate
amounts of these compounds found in the cigarette smoke from
various tobacco ble,nds and tobacco types .
TABLE I
POLYCYCLIC AYUROCARL'ONS IN CIGAIti';.rJ'B SMOKE
~antity, Micrograms pcr Y.i_lol ;ram of Tobacco Smokcc h i .n thc Ci.~arrt_t c Su,r .kc tr,~n,
CAi31 :T.- WINSTON-
Type Type WINS''ON-
WINSTON CAMEL SALEM Flue- Fluc- Type Turki.sit
Polycyclic ilydrocarbon Blend Blend B lend Cured Cured BurlSy hle„d
_ G-7X l:ent: Lriri:
(28) (11,14) (15) (15) (15) (15) (15) (15) (21.)
1. Anthracene (XXXVI) 275 104 178 257 212 269 299 126 246 •i-
2. Pyrene (XXXVII) 60 95 34 53 53 55 86 26 52 -I-
3. FluoranL•hene (XXXVIII) 260 152 190 247 205 266 330 1i,0 205 208
4. Benzo(a]pyrene (XLI) 64 84 65 67 63 77 119 33 60 82

,. .
.c,
5. Chrysene (XL) 44 + 10 31 23 19 18 6 30 •t•
6. Benzja]anthracene (XXXIX) 17 2 .5
7. Benzoj hi]perylene (LVII) 17 +
8. Dibenzoja,h]pyrene (LXII) trace 0 .9
9. 1-Methylpyrene (XLVII) 3 trace
10 . Dibenzojdef,mno]chrysene (IXIV) 7 trace
11 . Acenapht-hylene (XXXIII) 500 +
12 . Pltenanthrene (XXXV) 140 +
13 . Naphthalene (XXIX) 2280 +
14 . 1-iìc thy 1naph tha lcne (XXX) 360
15 . 2-i•icthylnahiithalene (XXXI) 1000 00TS OTLZS

TABLE I (Cont'd)
Quantity, Micrograms per Kilogram of Tobacco Smoked, in the Cx_f;arrt:er Smolsr Frol :1
CAMEL- WINSTON-
Type Type WINSTON-
WINSTON CAMEL SALMi F lue- F lue- Type Turkish
Polycyclic llydrocarbon Blend Blend Blend Cured Cured Burley Blend G-7Y. Kent.- Lark
16 . Acenaphthene (XXXII) 1720
17 . Fluorene (XXXIV) 230
18 . 9-Methylphenanthrene (XLVI) 43
19 . Dibenz[a,h]anthracene (XLII) 15
20 . 1-Methyl-3,4-dihydronaphthalene 250
(XLIII) ,.,
V
21 . 2-Phenylnaphthalene (XLIV) 140
22 . 9-Methylanthracene(XLV) 60
23 . 4-Methylpyrene (XLIX) 62
24 . 2-Methylpyrene (XLVIII) 51
25 . 5-Methylbenz[a]anthracene (L) 3
26 . Benzo[ ii]fluoranthene (LI) trace
27 . Benzo[j]fluoranthene (LII) trace
28 . Benzo[k]fluoranthene (LIII) trace
29 . Benzo[c]phenanthrene (LIV) trace
30 . Perylene (1.V) 14
tOtS OtLtS
31 . B~o[ e]pyrene (LVI) 44
32 . Q . ..mnthrena (T,17III) 6
S
TAT,LF I (Cont'd)
Quantity, Micrograms per Kiloram of Tobacco Smoked, in thc Cigayecrr_ ;;u~l ;•:•
CAr1F L- WINSTON- - --
Type Type WINSTON-
WINSTON CAMEL SALEM Flue- Flue- Type Tur.ki.sh
Polycyclic 1lydrocarbon . Blend Blend Blend Cured Cured Burley lslcnd G-7X I :c•ul
33 . Naphtho[2,3-e]pyrene (LIX) trace
34 . Naphtho[2,3-a]pyrene (IX) trace
35 . Dibenr.o[a,l]pyrene (LxI) trace
36 . Dibenzo[a,i]pyrene (LXIII) trace
37 . Coronene (IXV) 3
38 . 2,3-Dihydro-lii-benzo[a]cyclopent- c-~
[h]anthracene (?XNI) trace
39 . 10,11-Dihydro-911-benzo[a]cyclopent-
[i]anthracene (IXVII) trace
40 . Dimethylphenanthrenc(s) 140
41 . Methylfluoranthene 43
42 . Methylchrysene(s) 22
43 . Methylbenzo[a]pyrene 6
ZOTS OILTS
2 . REDUCTION OF TFI r*!XNT OF POLYCYCLIC Hl'OROCai.EONS
IN CIGARETTE S"'•OI:E
It has been demonstrated in this laboratory that the amount

of the total polycyclic hydrocarbons in cigarette smoke can be
reduced by the following methods :
(a) by use of r.:ore effective filtering agents
(b) by use of porous or s .iuminized paper`
(c) by addition of certain compounds to the tobacco, to the

filter tip material, or to the cigarette paper
(d) by choice of tobacco leaves
(e) by solvent extraction of tobacco
i . By Use of Ilore Effective Filtering Agents (15)
Table II illustrates the results obtained in studies to

determine the effect of various filter tip mate=iels on the
amounts of nicotine, total solids, total polycyclic hydro-
carbons, and benzo[a]pyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) in WINSTON blend
tobacco smoke .
ii . By Use of Porous or Aluminized Paper (15, 18)
Tab le III illustrates the results obtained in studies to

determine the effect of porous or aluminized paper on the
nicotine, total solids, and total polycyclic hydrocarbons in
WINSTON blend tobacco smoke . The aluminized paper had very
little effect on the quantities of these in the cigarette
smoke .
iii . By Addition of Certain Compounds to the Tobacco,

to the Filter Tip Material, or to the Cigarette
Paper (15, 18, 19, 22, 29, 30)
Table IV shows the results obtained in studies designed

to find suitable additives (usually inorganic compounds) which
could be placed on the tobacco to reduce the amount of the
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, particularly benzo[alpyrene
(3,4-benzpyrene), in cigarette smoke . It should be noted that
alumina (29), hydrated alumina (18, 22), catalytic rhodium,
palladium, and platinum supported on alumina (29), magnesium
nitrate hexahydrate (22) and aluminum nitrate nonahydrate (22)
were quite efficient . Hydrogen peroxide (22), am .~nonium
O:• :EL'a . ..2 ) , C` . _ .:i: ( 22 ) ~ m et :1J^. i î: t= 2), , . . ~ .. :: i :1L•~:: ;)Cr-
~7 ~•
chio_,. ;: e ^.or.ahydr_t„ ~--i , and a :.ur., :nu ... a c ;;tcta tet :ahycrate
'22 ) ve i . --C-~e c :.a::ft: . :Cle ''••4 ..• 4- 10'
n o~ sL'1~L• r
Ll:v4-r~•.•6•- .• n.i . r r . . ..in total p
.•. .iJe olyYyc l- rc y r J ca r ./ o ^s and
i{ .-
c.c^.cc'_ ;pyrene (3,'+-bencpyreze) in the smoke (22) .
The use a s filter t :.p additives of agents such as chlor a r.il

G':. 2 ,=:, 7 -t r i ::it :c t 1L'o :e :.one (1 10 , 30) which are known to co mp leX
with the polycycac : ydrocarbo :a ciC not result in any marked
decrease in the total polycyclic aydrocarbons at nominal levels
of the comple: : :.: g agent (0 .6 or 0 .> .:.o . per filter tip in the
case of the tr :n_ :_ofiuorenone) . At a high level, chloranil
(6 .0 mg . per filter tip) produced a 23 percent reduction in
total polycyclic hydrocarbons . However, chloranil is a mucous
membrane irritant in the human .
Mixtures of sodium and potassium salts of citric acid

applied to cigarette paper resulted in a decrease in the total
polycyclic hydrocarbons in WINSTON cigarette smoke (15) .
iv . By Choice of Tobacco Leaves (15)
Table V shows the effect of position of the tobacco leaf

on the stalk on the amount of the po7rcyclic hydrocarbons in
the cigarette smoke derived therefrom . Although there may
be a discrepancy in the results obtained in the case of the
burley tobacco samples due to a possible interchange of
samples, it is obvious from the data obtained that tobacco
leaves can be chosen to give low values of total solids and
polycyclic hydrocarbons in the smoke derived therefrom .
TAP,LE I I
FILTER TIP MATERIALS : EFFECT ON NICOTINE, TOTAL SOLIDS, TOTAL POLYCYCLIC

HYDROCARBONS AND BENZO[a)PYRENE 1- IN WINSTON BLEND TOBACCO SrIOKE (15 )
Nicotine3 Total Solids 3

Filter Tip in Smoke in Smoke Total Benzo[aJp)'renc l
Length, Mg . / Red' n Mg . / Red' n Mg . /kg. Red'n y/kg . Red' n
Materia l men. Ci . % Ci . % Smoked % Smoked %
Nil. -- 1 .97 -- 26 .0 58.3 81
Estron 8/70 17 1 .48 25 20 .7 20 50 .5 13 77 5
Estron 8/70 17 50 .5 13
Estron 8/70 17 _ 46 .2 2 1
Estron 8/7 0 17 1 .43 2 7 20 .5 21 51 .6 11

Estron 8/70 plus
17 1 .44 27 20 .7 20 50 .2 12
2% DOW ET 358
Estron 8/70 17 1 .44 27 19 .7 24 50 .2 12
Estron 3 .3/66 17 1 .22 38 16 .0 38 33 .5 4 3
Dico 230 17 30.9 47
Dico 240 17 -- -- 32 .3 45
Ecusta TOD 705 10 1 .19 40 16 .4 37 39 .4 32 63 29
Ecusta TOD 705 17 0 .94 52 13 .6 48 26 .8 54 52 36
Ecv -t:a TOD 705 24 0 .65 67 9 .6 63 23 .3 60 43 4 7
Nil -- 1 .60 -- 22.2 -- 58 .3 -- 81 --
Ecusta TOD 17 0 .88 45 13 .5 39 26 .5 55 52 3 6
Ecusta TOD plus 207. 13 .5 39 22 .8 61 48 4 1

17 0 .83 4 8
polyethylene
13, 4-Ben'l.pyrene 3Analyses conducted by Analytical Division
268-Ien . WINSTON tobacco rod ; Type 543 paper 4Analyses conducted by Chemi.cal. Dixi.si.c~n
(See Tab1e IV, Footnote 21 for description )
• S0T5 OTLIS
23
EF73"T OF
•
. .• :r1C
Total
coti:: a- Total So1ids Polycyclic 3
; ~ ~ in Smoke Hvdrocarbons
P .:per Filter Tip *s ./ ReG'n ::g . / Red' n Mg . /kg . Red' n
T%-,e Materi al Cic
-._ ...: % Cia . 9. Sr•^.oked °G
543 Estron 8/70 1.44 -- 19 .7 50.2
552 Estron 8/70 1.17 19 15.7 20 32 .4 35
543 Estron 3 .3/66 1 .22 -(15) 4 16 .0 -(19)4 33.5 -(33)4
552 Estron 3 .3/66 0 .76 38(47)4 13 .1 18(33)4 25 .4 24(50)4
543 Estron 8/70 1 .58 -- 18 .7 -- 48 .1
Alumi-
nized Estron 8/70 1.50 5 19 .4 -4 49 .5
168-mm . tobacco rod ; 17-mm. filter tip .

2Analyses conducted by Analytical Division .
3Analyses conducted by Chemical Division .
4Values in parentheses represent percent reduction from that obtained for
WIl`STO\ cigarette smoke [type 543 paper (see Table IV, Footnote 21 for
description) ; 68-m . tobacco rod ; 17-mm. Estron 8/70 filter tip) .
.
TABLE IV
EFFECT OF ADDITIVES TO TllE TOBACCO, TO 17IE PAPER, AND TO THE FILTER IP i•i~T F,RIALS
ON NICCYrINE, TOTTAL SOLIDS, TOTAL POLYCYCLIC HYROC.ARBONS, ANI) BEN2O[1]RENE: IN C :IC.Aitl•:7:1'i: Si :`)i :l:
Nicotine 2 Total Sol } ds Polycyclic Ilyd rocrirbo ns3

Additive in Smokc in Smoke Total 13enzo[ a ] py rcttc r _
Mg. /g . Mg . / Red' n Mg . / Red' n Mg . /kg . Red' n y/kp, . Red' n

Material Tobacco Cit; . % Ci . % Smoked % Smoked
To WINSTON Blend Tobacco :
Nil (29 ~ --4 1 .17 -- 15 .2 -- 39 .0 -- 10

Alumina s6 (29) 20 .0 1 .00 15 '13 .6 11 36 .5 6 ~~
11)
5% Rhodium on alumina5 ~29) 20 .04 0 .78 33 11 .6 24 29 .7 24 '
57. Palladium on alumina (29) 20 .04 0 .90 23 10 .5 31 •27 .1 30 ?1
5% Platinum on alumina5 (29) 20 .04 1 .04 11 10 .2 33 26 .0 33
Nil (22) -- 7 -- -- -- -- 51 .1 -- 83 --
Sulfur (22) 0 .107 -- -- -- -- 61 .1 -20 90 -9
Sulfur (22) 0 .257 - -- -- -- 65 .9 -29 101 -22
Nil (22) , --8 -- -- -- -- 48 .8 -- 81 --

Hydrated alumina9 (22) 3908 -- -- -- -- 35.6 28 70 14
8
Nil (22) 47 .3 -- 90
Hydrogen peroxide (22) --8,10 46 .6 1 --
Magnesium nitrate hexahydrate
(22) 50 .0 8 37 .6 20 26 68
Ammonium oxalate (22) 45 .1 4 -- --
2 1. 08,11 51 .0 -8 -- --
Cystine (22)
Methionine (22) 1 .258,11 50 .2 -6 --
Nil (22) -- '1 .37 -- 19 .4 -- !e . o 50 .6 -- 82

Magnesium nitrate hexahydrate
(22) 20 .0 1 .23 10 19 .8 -2 17 h 44 .0 13 51 38
Aluminum perchlorate J
nonahydrate (22) 20 .0 1 .36 1 19 .8 -2 '' 49 .8 2 82 0
Aluminum nitrate
nonahydrate (22) 20 .0 1 .28 7 19 .7 -2 43 .1 15 45 45
Alu m acetate tetra-
hydo (22) 20.0 1 .49 -9 1819 .7 -2 48 .9 3 78 5 9-
TABLE IV (Cont'd)
Polycyclic llydr.ocarhou ::3 _

Nicotine Total Solids
Additive in Smoke2 in Smoke2 Total P.en•r,o[aJpyr.i•nr.l
T18 . / Red' n Mg . / Red'n Mg . /k8 . Red' n y/kp. . ILcd' n
M ter ia 1 Tobacco _.~ %~ Cir % Smoked % Siwl:cd 7,
Nil (182 -- 1 .58 18.7 -- 48.1 --

Alumina (18) 250 1 .15 27 14 .3 24 39. 5 18
. ;
To CArU:L Blend Tobaccol2 i?
Nil (182 -- 2 .27 -- 25 .7 -- ?"f 31 .3

Alumina (18) 250 1 .63 27 21 .3 1P?"Ì'' : 26 .0 17
.' ^
To Flue-Cured Tobaccol3
.rh'! 4
Nil - 1.91 -- 24 .4 -- 7).l --
Aluminum nitrate nonahydrate 20 .0 1 .83 5 25 . 0 -2 1191 .5 31 „-
To Filter Tip Mater.ia116 (30) :
Filter Tip Additives Triacetin

Mg . / mg• /
Material Filter Tip Filter Tip
Nil -- 12 43 .0
Chloranil 6 .0 12 33.0 23
Nil 12 • 1 .10 -- 15 .9 43.8

Trinitrofluorenone 0 .6 12 1 .11 0 15 .9 0 40 . 3
Nil -- 18 1 .11 -- 15 .3 41 .6
Trinitrofluorenone 0 .9 18 1 .06 5 15 .2 0 38 .9 7
g0Z5 OtLtiS
}
TABLE IV (Cont'd)
Total So l ids polycyclic llych-oc arO

_honc3
To Cigarctte Paper (15) : Nicotine
in Smoke2 in Snpke2 _ Total J:enza[ a] pyi-cnr. 1
Mg . / Red' n Mg . / Red' n Pig. /k8 . Rcd' n y/lcg . l.ncl' n
Paper Tvne Ci . % Cis%~ Smokcd % - Sitwked %
A17,18 65 .3 --
AAA 17,19 55 .2 15
A17,18 71 .3 --
AAA 17,19 63 .7 11
A 17, 18 65.3 --
AAA 17,19 51 .1 22
M17, 20 51 .3 22
54321,22 50 .5
r~
13 , 4-Benzpyrene . 1368-mm. tobacco rod .
2 Analyses conducted by Analytical Division . 14The Analytical Division, ti s .inf; an entirel.y di .ffc•r,'i,t-
analyti•cal procedure, reportrd 73 y/kg . of t•c+b :,c,•„
3 Analyses conducted by Chemical Division . smoked .
468-mm. tobacco rod ; 17-mm. Estron 3 .3/66 filter 15The Analytical Division reported 58 Y/kl ; . of t,+boccc,
tip ; type 556 paper . •smoked, for a reduction of 21 percent .
50bt:ained from Engelhard Industries, Inc ., 16WINSTON blend tobacco ; 68-nxn . tobacco rod ; 17-nnn .
ir',twark 2, N . J . Estron 3 .3/66 filter tip .
6The alumina employed was that used as catalyst 17WINSTON blend tobacco ; 70-mm . tobacco rod ; 15-nn,r .
support in the experiments involving rho d ium, Estron 8/70 filter tip .
palladium and platinum .
18Type A paper contains no citric acid ,s :rlts .
7 70-nun . tobacco rod ; 15-mm. Estron 8/70 filter
tip ; type AAA paper (see footnote 19) . 19Type AAA paper contains 1 .4 percent of citric acid
equivalent (1 :1 sodium:potassium) .
8 68-mm . t-blcco rod ; 17-mm . Estron 8/70 filter
tip ; type AAA paper (see footnote 19) . 20Type AA paper contains 2 .0 percent of citric acid
equivalent (1 :1 sodium :potassium) .
9 0bt a in.•cl from Reynolds Metals Co .
10 5% of a 357~ solution of hydrogen peroxide, v/w . 21Type 543 paper contains 0 .87 of citric acid equi . va lc•nr
(3 : a1 sodium : potassium) .
11Equoent to 0 .25 mg . of sulfur per g . of tobacco . 22t•IItiSTON blend tobacco ; 68-mm . tobacco rod ;
1270-mm . Ynhnrrn rnfi .
TABLE V
POSITION OF LEAF ON STALK : EFFECr ON FATS AND WAXES,

FLAVORANTS, AND NICOTINE IN T013ACCO AND ON NICOTINE, TOTAL
SOLIDS, TOTAL POLYCYCLIC IYI)1tOCA12130NS, AND BENZOfa]1'Y121 :NTIN CI(:Ar.r.~rrl~: Sri01 :1:/- (15)
~ Tobacco
?~ ~ o
Smoke .~ ,~
01
Ether-Solubl.c Platcri n 1 :;3
Total Polycyclic Benzo[a]- Fats
Position of Nicotine3 Solids3 Hydrocarbons4 pyreneT94 and
Leaf on mg :/ mg•/ mg ./kg . y/kg . Nicotine3 Total Waxes F lavoran t :s
Stalk ci3; . cig . Smoked , Smoked Y
Flue-cured Tobacco :
b,~ ~~~ 1,) - ., . . g~ f. •
Upper Quarter
Lower Quarter
2 .34
1 .56
29 .0 ti '
23 .1 1t' ~
40 .2 l
31 .7
.
: •. . • .
69
54
2 .06
1 .54
7 .93 6 .ti4 „
5 .63 ~: .51 1
:, 1 .39
1 .12
.• .
./
Burley : •
Upper Quarter5 5 .14 32 .2 ~2t 60 .0 I , ~gi, 85 3.60 8 .03 6 .65
Lower Quarter5 2 .82 ~ 21:4 / t•~{ 43 .6 ' 63 3.91 6 .90 5 .44

f
13,4-Benzpyrene
eb
2Type AAA paper (see Table IV, footnote 19, for description) ; 68 mm . tobacco rod .
3Analyses conducted by Analytical Division .
4Analyses conducted by Chemical Division .
5It is possible that these samples were interchanged with respect to designation during srnne hhase c,L tatc
several analyses . However, the important fact is that thpre is considerable difference betwc:ru the
amounts of the total polycyclic hydrocai k ~leaves situated differently on the tobacco
plant .
OtZS OZLIS
30
v . Ey Solvent Exz :act ;on of' =o ::acco (12, 13, 15)
The results of t : e of =â e-__ect of solvent

e}:trac; ion of tobacco on the poly cyciic hydrocarbon of the
smoke condensate are su=Gr_ced in Table VI . The following
conclusions ây be drau~r, fro ., these data :
(a) Solvent extraction using ?entane, hexane, or ether

of a particular tobacco t~pe reduced the polycyclic
hydrocarbon content of t :L smoke .
(b) Solvent extraction of a blend of tobaccos, e .g .,

CAMEL or WINSTON blend, resulted in a decrease in
the total polycyclic hydrocarbons in the smoke
condensate .
(c) Solvent extraction of the constituent of a blended

tobacco type, e .g ., the Turkish blend, flue-cured
blend, or burley blend, in WINSTON blend, followed
by incorporatiorn of the extracted tobacco with the
other two components (non-extracted) still yielded
a reduction in total polycyclic hydrocarbons in the
smoke . In this respect, extraction of the Turkish
blend portion of the WINSTON blend produced greater
reduction in total polycyclic hydrocarbons than did
.similar extraction of the flue-cured blend . Extrac- ~
tion of the burley blend yielded the lowest reduction .
(d) Hexane extraction of a tobacco type or a tobacco

blend followed by partition of the hexane extract'
with aqueous alcohol permitted separation of the
generally nonpolar and nonflavorful tobacco com-
ponents from the generally polar and flavorful
components . When the polar, flavorful fraction
was returned to the hexane-extracted tobacco and
the resulting tobacco was smoked, a pronounced
reduction both in the amount of the total poly-
cyclic hydrocarbons and in the amount of benzo[ .Rj- Ln
pyrene in the smoke was observed (1) . These values )-A
were not too different from those obtained with the m
smoke from the hexane-extracted tobacco itself . It v,
was concluded from these findings that the polar, ~_A
flavorful fraction from tobacco did not contribute ~'
markedly to the polycyclic hydrocarbon content of
the smoke (See also Section A .I .b .3 .) .
In every experiment in which solvent extraction was carried

out, either on the whole or on a portion of the tobacco consti-
tuting the cigarette, a reduction in polycyclic hydrocarbon and
benzo(aJpyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) content of the smoke was observed .
A patent on the extraction procedure plus the partitioning of the ~
extract has been issued to the Company (1) .
TABLE VI
SoLVENT PnE'rICFATiÌENT OF INDIVInUAL TOBACCM TYPI :S AND TOBACCO BU.NDS : ErTI:("r ON T(r'rA) .
POLYCYCLIC ItYDROCAR1i0NS ANl) BENZOI a]PYRENEI IN CICARETl'1 : St101C1: (12, 13, 15)
Polycycl.i.c IydYorarban :: in Siaolu_ -

Extraction Tota 1 - - L cnvc, a] l! >_rV
-n
Tobacco State of Time, Temp . Ng . /kg . P,ed' n y/icf ; . tted' n
Extracted Subdivision Solvent hr . °C . Smoked % Smo_kcd _ _ry.
_ _
CAMEL Blend Tobacco (70-mm . tobacco rod, type A2 paper) : ~- - ~
Nil cut --- --- -- 23 .5 -- 81, --

CAMEL Blend cut pentane 4 .0 25 14 .3 39 21 7 5,
CAtiEL-type Flue-cured Tobacco (70-mm . tobacco rod, type A2 paper) :
Nil cut --- --- -- 18 .0 -- 67 -

Flue-cured cut pentane 4 .0 25 14 .2 21 47 30 c,_.~. .
Flue-cured cut ether 4 .0 25 6 .3 65 7 90
Turkish Blend Tobacco (70-mm . tobacco rod, type A2 paper) :
Nil cut --- --- -- 55 .8 -- 11.9

Turkish Blend cut pentane 4 .0 25 21 .9 61 3/ 73
Turkish Blend cut ether 4 .0 25 5 .5 91 4 96
Turkish Blend Tobacco (68-mm . tobacco rod, type AAA3 paper) :
Nil leaf --- --- -- 56 .5 -- --

Turkish B lend leaf 9:1 hexane : 2 .0 60 36 .4 35 --
isopropyl
alcohol
ZZZS OILTS
TA13LE VI (Cont'd)
Polycyclic liydrocarbons iii :n, kr

_
Extraction Total _ Ben :•.o( a]hyrrr1r L _
Tobacco State of Time, Temp . ri£ . /kg . Red' n y/kF ; . Rc•d' n

Extracted Subdivision Solvent hr . °C . Smoked % Smc~l :cd %.
WINSTON Blend Tobacco (70-asn . tobacco rod, 15-mm . Estron 8/70 filter tip, type AAA3 p :+.p('i) :
Nil cut --- --- --- 52 .7 -- 75 --

Turkish Blend4 cut ether 4 .0 25 37 .1 30 36 5?
Turkish B1end5 cut ether 4 .0 25 50 .8 4 75 (1
Turkish Blend6 cut ether 4 .0 25 64 .7 -23 91 -2 ].
Nil strips --- --- -- 57 .1 -- 81

Turkish Blend leaf ether 24 .0 25 28 .2 51 11 . FSG
WINSTON B lend strip ether 24 .0 25 22 .0 61 10 89
WINSTON B lend strips hexane 24 .0 60 30 .2 47 12 .5 8/1
Turkish Blend leaf ether 24 .0 25 23 .77 56 9 .58 ."•°

F lue-cured strips ether 24 .0 25 34 .27 37 338 GC~
Burley strips ether 24 .0 25 47 .77 12 56 8 30
Nil . strips --- --- 56 .4 -- 76

WINSTON Blend strips hexane 7 .0 6 .5 28 .7 49 22 7].
Nil cut . 55 .1 -- 79 -
WINSTON Blend cut hexane 2 .0 60 20 .4 63 32 6U
WINSTON Blend cut heptane 2 .0 83 26 .4 52 45 43
Nil strips --- --- -- 53 .3 -- 83

Turkish Blend leaf hexane 2 .0 60 39 .6 26 --
Turkish Blend leaf hexane 24 .0 60 36 .7 31 --
£TTS OrLIS
TABLE VI (Cont'd)
poly cycli.c ]ly_drocarbon s i»

Extraction Tota 1 ~ ] 1>~ rc•lu .1
Tob ;!cco State of ' Time, Temp . Mg . /kg . Red' n Y/kf : . itrcl' n
rxt•ractcd Subdivision Solvent hr . °C . Smoked % SnK•krd 7.
WINS''ON Blend Tobacco (68-mm, tobacco rod, 17-mm . Estron 8/70 filter tip, type AAA3 pape r) :
Nil strips 47 .5 -- 87 --
Turkish Blend leaf 9 :1 hexane : 2 .0 60 30 .8 35 39 52
isopropyl
alcohol
Turkish Blend Tobacco (70-mn, tobacco rod, 15-mm . Estron 8/70 filter ti12, type AAA3 L1apcri :
Nil cut -- 49 .4 -- 11.9

Turkish Blend6 cut ether 4 .0 25 50 .3 -- 1.1.5
w
w
WINSTON-tYpe Burley Tobacco (70-mm, tobacco rod, 15-mm . Estron 8/70 f.ilter ti .p . ty pe _AAA3 raJ~~r
Nil strips 49 .4 -- 75
,
Burley strips ether 24 .0 25 23 .9 52 56 5
13,4-Benzpyrene ; data for other individual polycyclic 50ne equivalent of Turki sh b letxl tvbTc•co cxt rac : t:
hydrocarbons were obtained but are not reported here . was returned to the extracted Turkish blend .
2See Table IV, footnote 18, for description of Type A 6Pive-t-hirds equivalent of Turkish blend t-obacc :o .
cigarette paper . extract was returned to the extracted Ttirkish
blend .
3See Table IV, footnote 19, for description of Type AAA
cigarette paper . 7An average of 54 .0 mg . of polycyclic hS•dror.,n-botis
per kilogram of tobacco smoked was usccl as c.ontrol.
40ne-third equivalent of Turkish blend tobacco extract value .
was returned to the extracted Turkish blend .
8An average value of 83y bcinzC)( .-ijpyrr.ne (3,4-
benzpyrene) per kilogram off tobacco suwkec] wasc
used as control value .
~tit5 01 Lt5
3 . Pkr,CU :SORS 0:
On the .csis o_ .:':e : esu :ts o :.tc : ncd in the above-described

studies, the pri:cursv~s .. .n tob~,i:cco o-z :.e polycvciic ilydrocarbJns
in snloke were studied . Solve :a extraction studies indicated th : t
a considerable proportio :: of c : ase precursors ;:er e re : :ovable from
the tobacco by organic solver.ts (12, 13, 15) .
Addition o,: a pents ne e ::tract of CAMEL blend cabacco to non-

extracted CAN;:::" bland tobacco resulted in a 20 parce,t increase in
total poiycyclic nyd :-ocarbons and a 33 percent inc :•o ::se irn the
amount of benzo[ajpyrene (3,4-benzpyrene) in the sma, :e . Similar
increases were noted when an ether extract of Turkish tobacco was
added to nonextracted Turkish tobacco . Partition of a pentane
extract of CAr2EL blend tobacco between equal volumes of hexane
and 9 :1 ethanol :water followed by addition of the 9 :1 ethanol :watcr
concentrate to an equivalent amount of CAMEL blend tobacco indicated,
on the'basis of no increase in total polycyclic hydrocarbons or
benzo[aJpyrene (3,4-benzpyrene), that the bulk of the precursors
was in the hexane layer from the partiticn . This was confirmed by
the observation of a substantial increase (about 40 percent) in
total polycyclic hydrocarbons in the smoke when the hexano fraction
from the partition was added to an equivalent amount of CAML blend
tobacco prior to smoking .
The structures of the known components of a pentane extract

of tobacco, which, in turn, would appear in the hexane phase of a
hexane-alcohol :water partition were considered in an attempt to
•
define the precursors in tobacco of the polycyclic hydrocarbons
in the smoke (22) . At least three types of compounds were shown
to be involved . Additiorn of a saturated hydrocarbon fraction
(typified by n-hentriacontane), 0-sitosterol (as representative
of the tobacco sterols), and solanesol (as representative of v,
tobacco terpenes) to tobacco increased the amount of the poly- ~
cyclic hydrocarbons in the smoke therefrom . Sclareolide (a con- ~
stituent of Turkish tobacco) and the substituted malonic acids
appeared to make no or negligible contribution to the polycyclic Ln
hydrocarbon content of tobacco smoke . These results are shown N
in Table VII . It is possible that sclareolide would yield
dibenz[a,h]anthracene (1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene) (XLII) on
pyrolysis during the smoking proces's .
XLII
Sclareolide
.! J
It is v er y ,: .Q .^.i.: :: ~ ,.s :. :a .`. o - i. ob .^. .•Co ot :itlr

than those studied :..: .' :, a p recursors oi the polycyclic
'r. y drocarbo ::s i n the tob a cco sr..o k e .
T ALB.T+:'+ M
EFFECT OF :"~ ~?CC0 CJXSTITuE~;_s r,'A o : ::Fi. 0?:G : •IC

CJ.:POJ\~S 0:' z :: T0' = ?O' 'C :'CLIC F:7i OC:. .'aOriS :`:D
EENZO ;a)?Y:E:iEI~?'X CiGAFW'!'= S ::DI:E (22)
?olvcvalic Hvdroca_ bons2

Additive Total Ber.zo[ajpyrene
Mg ./g . ag ./kg . increase y/kg . Increase
Nata_ ial Added Tobacco Sr..oked % S .:.ol:ed % r , . .~.
To WINSTON Blend Tobacco3 :
Ni1 -- 51 .1 -- 83 --
N+neral oil (TSC 350) 4 .0 57 .8 13 S7 5 ,
Solanesol 3 .2 58 .9 15 94 13
Solanesol 6 .4 63.3 24 94 13
Saturated hydrocarbons 2 .0 63.6 24 94 13 L. S
5 .0
Saturated hydrocarbons 4 .0 73.7 44 100 20
26 96 16 Y ,v
;.-Sitosterol 1 .9 64.3
r-Sitosterol 3 .8 72.1 41 106 28
Nil -- 48 .8 -- 81
Tripy:-istin 4 .0 51 .7 6 86 6 , ~
To G-7X4 :
Nil 26 .8 -- 33 .
Sclareolide 4 .5 28 .5 7 35 6
Disodium isopropyl- '
malonate 3 . 0 '~
Disodium sec-butyl- 26.5 -1 34 ~~ °~ ~ ~
malonate 4 .5 1
Saturated hydrocarbons 4 .0 40 .0 48 42 27 (,!1
13,4-Benzpyrene .
2Analyses conducted by Chemical"Division .
3Type A4A .paper (see Table IV, footnote 19, for description) ; 15-mm. Estron
8/70 filter tip ; 70-mm. tobacco rod .
4Type 543 paper (see'Table IV, footnote 21, for description) ; 68-r.im. tobacco
rod .
so
T :1a O-: ei . . : .: :.~y ~ .:S:~i: are t:•:0 ^^'`': me cG . ... . ._5~S i:rF:D~• :.a Ja c c o
components rz .• conve_ ced tr, polycyclic 'r.ydrocar bons du_ ing
z1tie si .'J+Li ::- ".:e : :.i :. :., and ^.~re obvious r. :icaa nis^,
involves ta .? _ .. : - . .~ po :yJ"c«c : ydrocarbO :.s from _ClaClveiV
_ .._'~e rr,oiecu :es structLrally _,, :atsd to the poivcyclic hrdro-
cw_oons by an essentially unir..oiecuiar reaction . E . g . , :~-
3:e,:triacon tar.e could be conve:-ced to ber.zo[ .g ;py_-ene (XLI) by
appropriate cyclizatioa, dehyd .oger.ation, :.nd fragnentation,
and ;-:-sitosterol could bz cor.verted to c:^.olar.threne (LVIII) by
a?propr :.ate cycl :.zation, dehyd. .~tion, dehydrogenation, and
f :war.u::~tation . The possible conversion of sclareolide to
dibanz[a,h]anthracene (1,2,5,b-dibenzanthracene) (XLII) has been
mentioned previously .
-H %
(CH2) g_n
n-hentriacontane XLI
2 2, -H20
HO
p-sitosterol LVIII
Indeed, individual pyrolysis of large molecular weight components

of tobacco does yield significant amounts of the polycyclic
hydrocarbons .
The second mechanism of polycyclic hydrocarbon formation

involves the degradation of tobacco components to small, highly
reactive entities which recombine at the elevated temperature
to form polycyclic hydrocarbons . E .g ., a tobacco component such
as n-hentriacontane at a temperature of 870° could yield acetylene
molecules, which in turn, could recombine to form benzo[a]pyrene
(3,4-benzpyrene) (XLI) ; terpenoid compounds such as neophytadiene
or solanesol eould yield isoprene, which in turn, could form
•
?o?ycyclic hydrocarbons . It has been known for four decades
that pyrolysis of acetylene or isoprene will produce polycyclic
hydrocarbons .
I t _s auite p_ob a :. le _ :.Ft : .:,:. : c-_c 1•• ;4 r OCc.•: b J .^.S
tobacco F. m JiCe a r ise b 4 bOL'.: f.lc c :+ : ::is .^.s ;` w C C .7nside r the fi r st
i^.'.c .^.a ::is :' descr i bed above t0 :. a t he :'J : e =-'p Jrt .: :lt of t *h e two .
TT T`sta i s
F- . - A1ô_a_ic tster ~:_ction
An aliphatic ester fractio :: was isolated from t:I\STO\,

Turkish, and bu:lay cigarette s-:oke (45-4?, 51, 52) . The constitution
CH3(C_'2)n+200CR
L?:VIII
of this ester fraction was elucidated as follows : Saponification of

the aliphatic ester fraction (LXVIT) yieldad a series of acids (LXTX)
and a series of norr.al lona-chained primary alcohols (T.}OC) . Treatment
of t ::e acids L}:IX with diazomethane, followed by vapor-phase-chromato-
grep : y and/or mass spectrometry of the methyl esters LXXI, indicated
the ::.ethyl esters of the follow :.ng acids : The saturated acids, myristic
to octacosanoic, inclusive ; the unsaturated acids, oleic and linolenic ;
several unidentifiable acids . Palmitic acid was the major constituent
of this acid fraction with myristic and/or stearic acid the next most
plentiful .
?e=manganate oxidation of the alcohols LXX, followed by treatment

of the resulting acids LXXII with diazomethane, yielded a series of
methyl esters LXXIII . Vapor-phase chromatography and/or mass spectro-
metry of LXXIII indicated the presence of the methyl esters of the
straight-chained acids varying in chain length from that of lauric
(C12) to that of heptacosanoic (C27) acid, inclusive . The alcohol
portion of the aliphatic ester fraction (LXVIII) must, therefore,
consist of the alcohols from dodecyl (lauryl) alcohol to 1-hepta-
cosanol, inclusive . 1-Docosanol comprised the major component of the
alcohol portion of the aliphatic ester fraction (LXVIII) .
1.. / . %~ : :I
RCOC:i - + C::%(CH~14-- , C:i20H
LXIX LX?:IV LXXV

l I
CH2N2/Et20 IKMn04/CSHSN CH2N2/Et20 KMn04/Me2C0
V V NY W
RCOOMe CH3(C"2)n+1C00H RCOOMe CH3(CH2)nC00H
LXXI LXXII LXXVI LXX VII
CH2N2/Et20 CHZ2/Et20
•
v v
CH3(CH 2)n+1C00Me CH 3(C"2)ri OOMe
LXXIII LXXVIII
P .• r oi ., sis of I:::VIII Et 4 75° in En iner : atmosphere yielded a series
o: :.cidS :: nd a s er ies of .. - El[Ce ::es " .. :1XV) . The co^:p osition of

. . :e : c~Gj . . . . 'Ali ::2 to be SiaJSiE:.tiEll•,i the Sam~e as ti: t of : ai3
acics C ::i_ction o : Ml'V y ielded a series of acids l ;nich
was converted to a series of me :.'r.y1 esters Lfi}:VIII . Vapor-phase chro-
m.atoo:-ap :.y ,::. ::!or mass spectrometry :.ncicated the pr esence of the methyl
esters of undecanoic (Cil) to 'r.exacasa :~oic (C2U) acid, inclusive . The
methyl ester found to be present in cile greatest amount was methyl
heneicosanoate indicating, on the basis of :he loss of one carbon from
the chain, that 1-docosanol comprised the major component of the alcohol
portion of the aliphatic ester fraction (LfiVIII) .
On the basis of these findings, the aliphatic ester fraction may

contain as many as 272 combinations of the acids LXIX and the alcohols
LXX since degradation yielded 16 known alcohols and 17 known acids .
Table VIII su=arizes these findings .
TABL:: VIII
MOk'\T CONSTITUENTS OBTAINED BX DEGRADATIOr

OF ALIPHATIC ESTER FRACTION' Ly :VIII
FROM TOBACCO SMOKE 4( 5-47 )
Alcohols Acids
1. Dodecyl alcohol (LXX, n=9) 1. Myristic

2. 1-Tridecanol (LXX, n-10) 2. Pentadecanoic
3. 1-Tetradecanol (L)M, n-11) 3. Palmitic
4. 1-Pentadecanol (LXX, n-12) 4. Heptadecanoic
5. 1-Hexadecanol (LXX, n=13) 5. Stearic

6. 1-Heptadecanol (Ly.', n-14) 6 .' Oleic (9-Octadecenoic)
7. 1-Octadecanol (LXX, n=15) 7. Linolenic (9,12,15-Octa-
decatrienoic)
8. 1-Nonadecanol (LXX, n-16)
8. Nonadecanoic
9. 1-Eicosanol (LXX, .n-17)
9. Eicosanoic
10. 1-Heneicosanol (LXF., n=18)
10 . Heneicosanoic
11 . 1-Docosanol (LXX, n-19)
11. Docosanoic
12 . 1-Tricosanol (LXX, n-20)
12 . Tricosanoic
13 . 1-Tetracosanol (LXX, n-21) Ln
13. Tetracosanoic ~
14. 1-Pentacosanol (LhM, n=22) J
F+
14 . Pentacosanoic m
15 . 1-Hexacosanol (LXX, n=23)
15 . HexacosanoiF Ln
16 . 1-Heptacosanol (LXX, n=24) ~
N
16 . Heptacosanoic m
17 . Octacosanoic
1. .~.V .~''..1GS~~T i~Ti :1 C.
iw .
.. :. T_
-`.
Solfinesyl acetate R G) was isolated from the
.-1 ~ Cra~ ..(Cii 3 )=l, :C.:-I J g00CR
"LY:iL.l'
cigarette smoke from WINSTON, Turkish, burley, and flue-cured

tobaccos (23, 24, 48-50) .
2 . SOLANESYL ESTER FRACTION
A solanesyl ester fraction (LXXIR, R~ Me) was isolated from

the cigarette smoke from WINSTON, Turkish, burley, and flue-cured
tobaccos (48-52) .
Saponification yielded solanesol (LR}IX) and a series of acids

which were converted to the corresponding series of methyl esters
by treatment with diazomethane . Vapor-phase chromatography of
these methyl esters yielded the acids listed in Table 7X .
H[ CH2C(CH3)-CHCH2190H
TABLE IX
KNOWN CONSTITUENTS OBTAINED BY DEGRADATION OF

SOLANESYL ESTER FRACTION LXXIX FROM TOBACCO SMOKE
Alcohol Acids
Solanesol (L~:) 1 . Lauric

cn
H
2 . Myristic N
H
3 . Palmitic
4 . Oleic (9-Octadecenoic)
5 . Linoleic (9,12-Octadecadienoic)
? 1
C.
? pizytostcr .'1 ester _raction t•:as ^_solated _ron the ciSarette

smoke -~o^ iUriCis : , :+'.: : ley, and I :Ue-CL : e d C3b'uCCOS (~~+5'-57) ..-57)
Saponification yieldad a :'aytosterol fraction plus a series

of acids . Conversion of the acids to the corresponding serias of
::a{~ :~y'i esters, :c.llowed by vapo .-p :-ase chromatoorapny of the r..ethyl
esters yielded acids listed in~Table X . Chronatographic fraction-
ation oi the phytosteryl f_action in3i cated the presence of stigmasterol
(L=I) and ;.-s :.tosterol (L?:,t:-xIl.) .
TABLE X
'sC~OW\ CO\STITiJJEETS DB I TED B :.' DEGRADATIO\

OF W'YTOSTERYL ESTER FRACTION FROM TOBACCO SMOKE
Alcohols Acids
Stig::zsterol (LXXXI) 1. Lauric

A-Sito£terol (LXXXII) 2. Myristic
3. Paimitic
4. Oleic (9-Octadecanoic)
5. Linoleic (9,12-Octa-
decadienoic)
Linolenic (9,12,15-Octa-
decatrienoic)
CH(CH3)CH=CHCH(C2H5)CH(CH3)2
HO
LM I
43
: :us, the phytostc_yl ester __,. .. :_ . . . - . :v contairn as r.cny as

12 co ::binations of the acids showri ? : :'ab'la X Er,d the phytosterols
<?. .\?:_XI ar.d ?-MN:Ii) since degr ;:cat :or. , :eicec six kr.oc::z acids and
two ? ::ytosterols .
d . h-Acetyl-2,3,4-tris-c-~.'-,- .:s_ :: .•livaleryl---D-alucopyr4noside
The sugar ester, c-scetyl-3,3,~:-t : :s-c-~- ::ath~*ivaleryl-,^.-D-

giucopyranoside was isolatec :_o^ Turkish tobacco cigarette
smoke and characterized on the basis of ir.frEred absorption, melting
point, and mixrure melting point studies (33) . Approximately 1 .4 g .
of this ester was isolated from the ss.oke for 20,560 Turkish tobacco
cigarettes (97 mg . per kg . of tobacco smoked) .
LXXXIII
0
MV s CH3CH2CH(CH3)CH2-C-
III . Lactones
a._ Sclareolide
Sclareolide (=IV) was isolated from the mainstream smoke of

cigarettes fabricated from Turkish tobacco grown in the Souyalissian
IXCXIV
region of Greece (27) . The sclareolide in the mainstream smoke

represented 28 .7 percent of that found in the tobacco, considered
on a^.oisture- and sand-free basis .
The sclareolide from the smoke (0 .736 g . from 20,560 Turkish

tobacco cigarettes ; 51 mg . per kg . of tbbacco smoked) was identified
on the basis of melting point and mixtu . :. melting point studies,
infrared spectra, . and elemental analyses of the isolated material
and its dimethylamide derivative .
•
:ZCJ
~ ~Gt
rrin l."h°.ric diter~,^ri:T:G :. ., .c::C :.o ::es, (L.~ XXV ) a .^.d

r.-leva: - e .^.olide trere i m
soia :.ed froti z 1:e c :. ;aret :.e smoke
'0~
~ ~._1 . . .
=V =VI
of Turkish tobacco grown in the Souyalissian region of Greece (2, 3) .

The identity of these lactor.es was confirmed on the basis of infrared
absorption data, optical rotation, and malting point studies . The
amount of cx-levantenolica ("'V) isolated reDresented 0 .0019 percent
of the tobacco smoked (19 mg . per kg . of tobacco smoked) ; the amount
of P-isomer (LXX}.'VI) represented 0 .00014 percent of the tobacco smoked
(1 .4 mg . per kg . of tobacco smoked) .
IV. Alcohols
a . Solanesol
The terpenoid alcohol solar .esol (=) has been isolated from
the cigarette smoke from WINST0\, Turkish, burley, and flue-cured
tobaccos (23, 24, 48-50) .
b._ rormal Long-chained P_rimary Alcohols
A series of normal long-chained primary alcohols (LXXXVII) was

isolated from WIhSTOh cigarette smoke (5, 6, 31) .
CH3(CH2)nOH
Oxidation of this series of alcohols yielded the corresponding

series of carboxylic acids . These acids, on treatment with diazomethane,
yielded a series of inethyl esters . Vapor-phase chromatography of the
esters indicated the presence of octadecanoic (C18) to tetracosanoic
(C24) acid, inclusive . Mass spectrometry of the acetates of LXXXVII
suggested the presence of 1-heptadecyl (C17) to 1-tetracosanyl (C24)
acetate, inclusive . These mass spectrometric and vapor phase chromato-
graphic results indicated that the series of alcohols contained 1-
heptadecanol to 1-tetracosanol, inclusive .
44-
c.
Cigcrette s .;.o :cc __;,rm burley, and ilue-cur ed

:.obacccs yiel4ru a series o' : nycostero_s, t'ae major Dart of which was
,_ .
. ..OS : Z o, . . . T ) (4S- 5 0)
.S{.-? .:r : .~i~..el .~l ~ : . . .. .1. - ) QnQ r-Fl i r l k 1+:1r~.. .l .
u . 12y-Hvcxoxv-l3-evirwnovi 0::idL
' 3w::iydro :;y-13-eDi manoyl o ::ide (=i1') was isolated from Turkish
tobacco smoke by - ; .o,uid-liquid pa:tirio : anc column chromatograp ;:y
(4, 34) . it was identified by its point, mixture melting
=IX
point, optical activity, infrared absorption, n .m.r . spectrum,,,and

mass spectrographic data . Approximately 0 .140 g . of LX}gCIX waa
obtained from the smoke from 20,560 Turkish tobacco cigarettes,(9 .7 gm.
per kg . of tobacco smoked) .
e .,_ Unsaturated Ao,yclic Isoprenoid Alcohols
Turkish tobacco smoke has yielded an acyclic isoprenoid alcohol

fraction (39, 41-43) . The presence of phytol in this fraction was
demonstrated as follows (39) : Acetylation of this fraction followed
by column chromatography gave phytol acetate (XC, R- Ac), saponi-
fication of which yielded phytol (XC, R- H), identified as its
3-nitrophthalic acid ester . No evidence for isophytol in this
fraction was obtained .
Ln
~
~
~
m
CH2OR
XC
~
p :es,: :ac ;, c_ .. : s :. .. . .~ :,-c C13, C^5, and C30 _sop :enoid
av_• . r ` :, - .ri 1 • " c
. s i e. s-o :. ::-de :•c ^ ~ ccr.c• ~ _ .~ . .__ ~• :: s :clo~ demoas~_ated-~_'-ated as
.c11o: ;s (41-43) : Cs.por -paasc: c :: .c :7_-tc~ : ;:-' .•ie : :;ed foar f_ac ;ao :.s .
_ :+e er..ar ;er.t ti:aes of the f_rsrt a : d secc ::d corresponded to those of
~arac:svl .:nC p7yto1, respect :vi: :y . . :0 .:, in_ : Fl: ed EbSOrpziOri and ttle
die ::crcr.ces between the cr..a : ;;on'. t: :-c s of gerr:r.iol, fwrncsol, and
ph .•tol, it was concluded .. . . ., t::e cr•d =ourth fractions from
t :.is c : .oaatograr.-. cor.cainedyC,)$ and 0,3 isa ; _a: oid alcohols,
respectively . 'So evidence for the CIO, C35, or C40 alcohols was
obtain ed .
r':cetylation of the smoke-derived alcohol fraction followed by

column and vapor phase chror,stography yielded four fractions whose
emergent times and mass, ultraviolet, and infrared spectra indicated
that (a) the -first fraction contained the acetates of the C15 alcohols
farnesol and a dehydrofarnesol with conjugated double bonds, (b) the
second fraction contained the acetates of the C2p alcohols phytol (XC,
R - ~) and dehydrophytols w'..th four and five double bonds (two of which
are conjugated), and (c) the third and fourth fractions contained
acetates of C25 and C30 isoprenoid alcohols, respectively . No evidence
for acetates of the C10, C35, or C40 alcohols was obtained . The ratio
of the amounts of the acetates of t :.e C15 :C20 :C25 :C30 alcohols was
appro ::i :nately 1 :2 .2 :1 .2 :0 .8 .
Chromic oxide-pyridine oxidation of the smoke-derived alcohol

fraction yielded a series of unsaturated aldehydes . Vapor-phase
chromatography of this aldehyde fraction yielded four fractions
whose infrared absorption and emergent times suggested the presence
of C15, C20, C25, and C30 isoprenoid aldehydes, respectively .
Catalytic hydrogenation of the smoke-derived alcohol fraction,

potassium permanganate oxidation of the perhydroalcohols to acids,
fo11owed by treatment of the acids with excess diazomethane yielded
a methyl ester fraction . Vapor-phase chromatography of this yielded
four fractions whose infrared absorption and emergent times suggested
the presence of the methyl esters of C15, C70, C25, and C30 isoprenoid
acids . The ratio of the amounts of the methyl esters of the C15 :C20 :C25 :C30
acids was approximately 1 :2 .5 :1 .5 :1 .
Thus the data on the smoke-derived alcohol fraction, its acetate,

its corresponding aldehyde fraction, and its corresponding saturated Ln
N
methyl ester fraction suggested the presence in Turkish tobacco smoke _J
of unsaturated isoprenoid C_5, C20, C25, and C3p alcohols ; no evidence ~
m
was obtained to indicate the presence of alcohols in the C10, C35, or
Ln
C40 series . ~
N
Ol
f ._ Macroc_vclic Aydroxvethers
The two macrocyclic diterpenoid alcohols cx-1,5-dimethy1-12-isopropyl-

9-met:.ylene-5,8-oxido-3,13-cyclotetradecadien-l-o1 (XCI) and cx-l2-isopropyl-
5,8-o::ido-1,5,9-trimethyl-3,9,13-cyclotetradecatrien-l-o1 (XCII) were
isolated from Turkish tobacco smoke by liquid-liquid partition and repeated
column chromatography in amounts of 15 .3 mg . and 6 .4 mg ., respectively, per
'T J
?.C I XCII
kg . of tobacco smoked (40, 60, 61) . \ .m .r . data for the dehydration

products from XCI and XCII permitted assignment of the structures
shown for XCI and XCII .
V. Phenols
a ._ _Isol_atio_n of Phenols_from C ;~_arette Smoke
1 . a-TOCOPHEROL
a-Tocopherol (Vitamin E) has been isolated from WINSTON

cigarette smoke (25, 26) . Confirmation of the identity of
HO
this compound was provided by infrared absorption studies of

the compound itself and by mixture melting point and infrared
absorption of its p-nitrophenylurethan . a-Tocopherol was also
detected in the smoke from flue-cured, burley,and Turkish
tobaccos .(48-50) .
2 . EUGENOL AND ISOEUGENOL
The two phenols eugenol (XCIII) and isoeugenol (XCIV) were

isolated from Turkish tobacco smoke (38) . The identity of XCIII
was established by vapor-phase chromatography and infrared
OH
CH2CH-CH2 CH-CHCH3
XCIII XCIV
F: .:sO"?tr0 : st,:i._i:S O~ : t: „$ :Li:l.z L`l :.raviolet
aosoipr :o n 5 ;., : ;.•: o= rL ^L : .h%.- e . . of •:CsV was
i:s t abi-F.:led w v ;:.p o r - ;, :asv a :: :.
s t udies Of th e isolated :.1ateria 1, by u•lzrav iol at absorption study
cf i ts meth}•1 ether, ar,d :.\• r.elt_^.g poi :~t, : ixture r..elting poin : :.
End infrared c.bsorpt :on scudies c_ its -nap :.ta y lureti:a:n derivative .
The amoun ::s of ea g :: ::o : ( :: ;,_I=) .:. ::d i soL .:aor.o'- (}:CIV) isolatod
were 5 .7 mg . and 21 :+g . , respact :vely, ?ar. ;:a . of tobacco smoked
3 . 0`HER ?iir.i;O:.S
A study conducted with Turkish tobacco smoke indicated the

presence of hydroquinone (XCV), 1-r.aphthol (XCVI), and a series
of xylenols (XCVII) . .
OH OE OH
I I
XCVI XCVII
b. :nalvsis for Phenols in Ci2arette Smoke
The quantities of the phenols, phenol (XCVIII), o-cresol (XCIX)

and a-cresol (C), have been determi :ad in the cigarette smoke from
WI\STO\, WWL, SALEM, C9 flue-cured, cased and uncased K4 burley,
Turkish blend, and special G7 tobaccos (32) . Tab1e .XI indicates the
results obtained in this study. Also included are the results of
the determir.ation of these three phenols in the smoke from cellulose
filter rods and from cigarettes containing methanol-extracted C9
flue-cured tobacco .
OH OH OH
CH3
XCVIII XCII: C
O1
F-~
N
Co
4S
?s.~r\..n T. ~. . . . .~- .~ } .~ n_ .
t _ ~ _ .;. ...nr.~-
S :..J: -
•
?'tii : = iC :1: C C y L 1 n--
C -- JJ T ^VLVJ .,~ (32)
M otal of phonol,
MTo bacco c-Cr,:sc_ o-Crzso_ o- and v-cresol
T .m e ,!C+{ . . . v / 1_ . Y / c' L• Y e. -~, //cii. . y /a. y/ciC . Y
C9 Flue-
cured 229 326 61 86 88 125 378 537
C9 Flue-
cured, 248 310 82 103 127 159 457 572
Methanol
Extracted
K4 Burley,`° `
Cased 134 196 59 86 116 170 309 452
K4 Burley,
Uncased 130 246 55 104 72 136 257 486
Turkish
Blend 192 278 41 60 77 111 310 449
Special •
G-7 45 87 17 32 31 59 93 178
Cellulose --- --- --- --- --- --- 9 23
ZdIIN STO\ 43 65 10 15 33 49 86 129
WINSTON,
no filter
tip 159 241 38 57 70 107 267 405
CArEL 183 269 57 84 81 119 321 472
SALEM 33 48 8 12 26 39 67 99 ~~
~
c ._ Precursors in Tobacco of Phenols in Tobacco Smoke
A study was conducteu cc ar.swer fcl'..owing questions (59) :
1 . Is the difference in amount of phenols in tobacco and tobacco

smoke as disparate as reported previously?
2 . Do the phenols in tobacco str.oke result from the thermal

decomposition of simple phenol derivatives like phenol glycosides,
salts or esters? If such derivatives are present in tobacco, are
they decomposable by chemical reaction?
3 . Do tobaccos contain a^y cor.stitua :rs wnich, on py~-olysis,
.•ieid paenols?
4 . Does robacco _ .. ..,.=f, orn py:alysis under the same conditions

as i :: 3, yield p : a : ols?
5 . Does any con stit : :L ::r added to tobacco during cigarette

:;a:vfactu.e yield phenols on py~ol .~s_s?
6 . Does spinach as rep :._ :.ad p :Lv :.ousiy : n smoke studies yield
less phenols on pyro=ysis does tobacco?
The answers to Questions 1 and 2 were obtained by an analysis for

the phenols phenol and,p-cresol in a steam distillate, in a chloroform
extract, in an alkaline hydrolysate, and i :n an acidic hydrolysate of
tobacco . Since none of these treatments yielded detectable quantities
of these two phenols, we concluded :
1 . The di fference in amounts of the ?henols phenol and P-cresol

in tobacco and tobacco smoke is as dispara :.e as reported previously .
2 . The concentration, of the glycosides, salts, or esters of

phenol and Q-cresol in tobacco must be negligible or zero since neither
alkaline nor acidic hydrolysis of tobacco released any appreciable
quantity of these two phenols .
The answers to Questions 3 to 5 were obtained by analysis for

the phenols phenol and u-cresol in pyrolysates of the tobacco con-
stituents cellulose, pectin, lignin, and glucose plus fructose (as
invert sugar) ; in a pyrolysate of the additive invert sugar (glucose
plus fructose) ; and in the pyrolysates of C9 flue-cured, K4 burley,
and Maryland burley tobaccos . Since appreciable quantities of phenol
and Q-cresol were obtained in each instance, we concluded :
3 . Tobacco constituents like cellulose, pectin, lignin, glucose,

and fructose may be precursors in tobacco of phenol and P-cresol in
cigarette smoke .
4 . The pyrolysis of C9 flue-cured, K4 burley, and Maryland burley

tobaccos does not proceed in a manner substantially different from the
pyrolysis of the individual tobacco constituents listed in 3 .
5 . The tobacco additive invert sugar (glucose plus fructose)

may be one source of phenol and 2-cresol in cigarette smoke .
Ln
~
The answer to Question 6 was obtained by analysis of phenol and ~
~
_v-cresol in a pyrolysate from powdered spinach . Per gram pyrolyzed, m
the spinach yielded approximately the same total quantity of phenol Ln
plus v_-cresol as did the Maryland tobacco in 4 and about 60 percent of r
w
the total quantity of these phenols obtained by pyrolysis of the C9 m
flue-cured and K4 burley tobaccos in 4 . We consider that our findings
agree substantially with previously reported data that spinach smoke
condensate contained about one-half the phenols found in the smoke
condensate from a cased commercial blend of tobaccos . Table XII
summarizes the findings from the pyrolysis studies .
~ . , --
- . .-Jw . .--
nn•. .,
~ ..~'. : ..Il .. .i
= . . .. .nT n . . .r.- .-..
.~ . '.~ ./ v .~ ..- .. ~-
Pheno 1,
. :croa=ams/c . vx*rolyzed
- - - i° C . ?''.Lôi u-Cresol
,-
Inai:': :ii:a1 const :tuents
Cel'_ulose* X2 550 460 215
Cellulose* N2 650 350 110
Pectin N2 550 310 130
LignN2 550 2370 2330
Lignin%rk Air 550 440 460
I nvert Su g ar N2 550 140 50
Tobaccos and spinach

•
C9 flue-cured N 2 550 730 310
K4 burley , cased N2 550 620 390
Maryland bur ley N2 550 470 150
Spinach N1) 550 360 280

~
~
V
~
srWhatman Cellulose Powder, W. and R . Balston Ltd ., England . m
**West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company . u,
~
w
~
VI . Acids
The smoke condensate from 20,560 Turkish cigarettes yielded in excess

of 20 g . of long-chained acids (45-47) . Infrared absorption data indicated
the possible presence of both saturated and unsaturated acids such as palmitic
acid, stearic acid, oleic acid, etc .
VII . Aldehvdes and Ketones
Examination of the smoke condensate from C .~ML cigarettes indicated

the presence of acetaldehyde, propionaldehyde, acetone, furfural (CI),
3-heptanone (CII), glyoxal (CIII), methyl glyoxal (CIV), biacetyl (CV),
and 2,3-pentanedione (CVI) (8) . Identification was based on infrared and
melting point studies of the 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazones of these com-
pounds (7) .
Zi
0
C'r.3C: C : `C :~C H3 OC::CHO
~ Ci:O
C: CII CIII
XCIX C
C::3COCH0 CH3COCOCH3 CH3COCOCH2CH3
C :V CV CVI
VIII . Heterocvclic Nitro¢en Cor,roounds
The ::eterocyclic nitrogen compounds pyrocoll (CVII), indole (CVIII),

3-mazhyl :ndole (skatole)(CIX), dimethylindoles, trimethylindoles, carbazole
i~
0
CVII CVIII CIR CX
(CX), and methylcarbazoles have been isolated from Turkish tobacco smoke by
liquid-liquid partition and column chromatography (35-37) .
The separation of indole from its homologs and the carbazole from its
homologs was accomplished by vapor-phase chromatography . Identification of
pyrocoll (CVII), indole (CVIII), 3-methylindole (skatole) (CIX), and
carbazol ;. (CX) was made in each case on the basis of melting point, mixture
melting point, infrared and ultraviolet absorption spectra, nuclear mag-
netic resonance spectrum (except for carbazole (CX)), and mass spectrometric
data .
Per 1000 Turkish tobacco cigarettes, the amounts in milligrams of these

compounds in the smoke were as follows : pyrocoll, 1 .3 ; indole, 1 .4 ; 3-methyl-
indole (skatole), 4 .3 ; dimethylindoles, 0 .8 ; trimethylindoles, 0 .5 ; carbazole,
0 .7 ; and methylcarbazoles, 0 .15 .
IX . Miscellaneous Comnounds
The following miscellaneous compounds have been isolated : furan (CXI)

and benzene (CXII), from CAMEL cigarette smoke and the isomeric 4-(2-buteny-
lidene)isophorones (CXIII) (44) from Turkish tobacco smoke .
52
:i~Cr
.~C: iC
CXII X
C III
X . Cc :nnErison of Different Tobacco Tvwes
Since the smoke condensates from burley, flue-cured, Turkish, and

ZdINSTO\ blend tobaccos were available at various times during our 8-year
study, we considered that the determination of some of the major com-
ponants of the so-called neutral fraction from these condensates would
urovide useful information concerning the relative composition of these
smoi:e cor.ca^.sates (48-50) . Unfortunately, the findings were not strictly
comr;a=abi,e because of the differences in the filter tip length on the
tobacco rods . However, the findings are presented in Table XIII despite
the limitations imposed on the comparative aspects of the various smoke
condensates .
•
5:
C~_. .r~ . .~. . . ~ : .~_ ..
:L• c o Z(:C :^ s w t C r o^
o_ r Ir:_s :- .-cL :; ::r 1Lv tdl 'N STC :: b lend
.. ~8 c rv b ^c C o~ Lo ba ccoC
` L r ..r e G
S4~ .' ..• ~~J V 630 5;:0 735
570 580 683 600
\eophyta4iene`'' 235 180 200 165
Squalene and isosqualene ? ? ? 4
Solanesenes + + + 85
Polycyclic hydrocarbor.sr 49 26 50 53
Authracene 0 .29 0 .21 0 .27 0 .28
Pyrene 0 .09 0 .05 0 .06 0 .06
Fluora :.:: :e::e 0 .33 0 .21 0 .27 0.26
EenzoL : .- ; yrene 0 .12 0 .06 0 .08 0 .06
Chryse :a 0 .02 0 .03 0 .02 0.04
u-To :.opherol 95 233 305 109
Solanesyl acetate + + + 25
• Solanesyl esters
Lona-chained saturated esters
+
60
120
+
40
+
66
4
:hy~osteryl esters + 65 15 26
Solar.esol 1500 2450 2570 530
Phytostarols 315 200 330 225
Phenols
3' :.enol 278 326 246 65(241g)
o-Cresol 60 86 104 15(57g)
p-Cresol 111 125 136 49(107g)
a7'0-mm . tobacco rod, no filter tip .
b70-mn . tobacco rod, 15-mm. Estron 8/70 filter tip .
e68-r.Lm . tobacco rod, 17-nm. Estron 8/70 filter tip .
dlncludes neophytadiene .
e?:ateriul w:zose infrared absorption agreed with that of pure neophytadiene . ~
f(?ualities for individual polycyclic hydrocarbons represent average values G

for sever&l deterr.iinations . Ln
w
g6S-mm . tobacco, no filter tip . ~
• (S'C-aC) XL:zr
..:..'•0,7 0078Gt'O~T,, SpFO-uata`3 •i •2j aU,7z zO
ad -3 j o ssoc,: :v~ : :c pa=zT,uapr uaaq an V q 005 j ;.oc V ctoz ;;:•~~ .^_ `CO8 =ôqv
3 naZ_ T n i:cJt e?YO' :SS OJOLCo .'ì :2'} S au e ::OC'z- O o ?O
ST O a En O :
•'[L^Z a a .''. n:1 ticjG::O :
0 v ti?c n iSZ S ; c:TC'~S 0 --lj a .: v2 }O ! 2 :T z
° . .^~6aaxe at : . :? .._
. u ; s ;71 - ." : ^ ::ot,r :
~C
.. . .L ~ , urr . . ... . . .. .;._ ~ rJC .? :. .. .c5 .;:::a .. ..~: Gw~u ~ ..r .._ . .s . : _ . . • u . . . r . .ur~ ., :.
. .:C C'v'~ : ._ .- . :. Ca C :.~,^ :.-Etta? :&t'2 J :. .. . . .ii. : . .__
?i- :i ; Mea:o-ranGa pa . .:inen_ to these p :oco ;:ur~ ::
c~~~ i:wo z :sa b,:aa ?.cna_ed (9, 10, 1-9, .515-SS) .
56
the ✓ ^Jir 6 I.l

.G4i. a 6
:. 4• . a If, rV . . .i~•~.4eraJle SC1 e :1~rrr c L,
. rlil• : .~. 4
: :a :: becn presentcd which reiates tcbacco ,, o : ._ng, particularly ci ; c,rot :e

to specific diseases . This evrua::ca consists of four t ;,-pe ;. ;
na :~c1y,
. statistical, pathological, bs.o1c ;;=cc?, and clie ::ical . Our Studi4s
h .^.ve been co :l,^.l^r ned solely ttiit :l the ia : t .3_ C.S :.a - the cCe" ic,^ i
oi t ;Db .,cco f',^~+ :e . For a consistent pic=ure to be Daint6d of cilJ : .`b :iCCo
s ;.yoice-d :sease problem, the evidence from each discipline m, :st a,-reo u•itii
that from .. :1a other three . :it . . _espect to the co .:.position of tob ;icco
smoke, ciell' cEl Cy : ;.i:':CE and the che :'ical evidence r eA :lrti't! by
othc:-s consis ::ent with the reoo_ted statistical, nathological, and
bioloeical data? To answer this question, let us first review briefly
the statistical, pathological, and biological data available .
The statistical data consist of the following : The results of some

29 retrospective statistical studies based on clinical findings have
indicated that the risk of developing lung cancer, especially opidermoid
or squamous cell carcinoma, increases with the amount of tobacco smoked
as cigarettes . When the tobacco is smoked as cigars or in a pipe, the
risk is m.:ca less . Presumably very few pipe and cigar smokers inhale ;
most cigarette smokers do inhale . Of these 29 retrospective studios,
none by itself proves a significant association between cigarette smoking
and lung cancer, but the combined evidence from the 29 studies is highly
suggestive of a significant association . This suggestion is bolstere d
by the results from seven prospective statistical studies whose results
indicated a significant association not only between cigarette smoking
and .lung cancer but also between cigarette smoking and heart disease and
•
several oz:er diseases . Although the results from these thirty-odd
retrospective and prospective statistical studies cannot prove a cause-
and-effect relationship between cigarette smoking and specific diseases
and although these results are not considered to be extrapolatable t o
the smoking population as a whole, the statistical evidence itself, with-
out contradictorydata, is irrefutable . At least four of these studies
have shown that inhalation of the cigarette smoke increased the risk of
developing lung cancer . However, the interpretation of this evidence
from the thirty-odd studies may and does vary . In these studies, each
one dealing with a relatively small study group (compared with the total
number of smokers in the population), the evidence indicates that the
heavy cigarette smoker in each study group has a greater risk than the
moderate smoker, the moderate smoker has a greater risk than the light
smoker, and the light smoker has a greater risk than the nonsmoker of
developing certain specific diseases .
Pathological data indicate that the number of sites of hyperplasia

and metaplasia in human bronchi is proportional to the amount of tobacco
smoked as cigarettes . Similar pathological conditions have been produced
in e :;perimental animals by exposing them repeatedly to cigarette smoke
under conditions requiring the animals to inhale the smoke . It has also
been shown that inhalation of tobacco smoke results in absorption of
fluorescent tobacco smoke components by cellular components of the
respiratory tract . The exhaled cigarette smoke is less fluorescent tha n
the inhaled smoke ; microscopy in ultraviolet light of the intact respiratory
•
tract exposed to cigarette smoke reveals fluorescent areas in the cells .
Of course, fluorescence is not synonymous with carcinooenicity . It has
also been shown that exposure of extirpated respiratory tract tissue to
whole cigarette smoke reduces the ciliary beat frequency with a concomitant
slos•ing down of the outward and upward flow of mucus . Thus the protective
57
. . . . . . . . . v . Or w . .C'Z r`S :, rrMa.VrY r vz .NaVo .rV

liC:_, r . ._v ra:~ .r . .r ...V .: _ .: C.rr_ ..r b ::w1: rrL . . . . . rJ
rC.sJ_ _ .. . .. . . .r . . . . . rv .
.:a'~ . . . . .. v ~ "_ .•it4 C :

the C r_rG:ry a e Hr rr eV VLa\. y can Je r e CMV{: d :c ..~:r V . _ :.a
. . .,.\• iL: Lr .L• v ur ..r bl e . C.ieF..s or _Ja :/:.r ."i a C. C.-1 ;[4
::ral : rso + .is :a~~3.$t~C
:.a~~3.$t~ C E :14 ;:t
to 2.' r om any y y . a5 : . .. : in pr G g.essi0 n o-~ t . :C
so ;. :Ce .
".:Qt:3 DlaSt~C .. .: : tiC tissue to cancer . Ciliastasis is ?_ c :a:CCCi

:TOt C :=y L:• ..r . . sô :Ce but S•.'a: ce_tain ciaa_Ctt .^, ,. . . . : ::L
r :act :Ga . Soma auz :Grities 5elieve that tize sec,uance, n :,r .-,1 tissue to
decil•'ated tiss~je to rk taplastic tissue to hyperplastic tissue ta cancer,
can be accox~plished by repeated exposure to an irritant . '
Biological studies involving skin pa :.nting have indicated that ciga-

rette smoke is carcinogenic to the skin of the mouse, rat, and rabbit .
Inhalation studies have indicated that exposure of lung cancer-susceptible
mice to cigarette smoke _esulted in an increased incidence of adenomas in
the exposed mice . Such experiments are criticited because no carcinomas
have been produced ; but the type of lung tumor cc.aracca :istic of the mouse
is the adeno :na, not the carcinoma . Other studies have i :Tdicated that both
whole cigarette smoke and certain cigarette smoke fractions are cocarcinogenic
(or promoters) for known carcinoger.s like the polycyclic hydrocarbons . Bio-
logical studies on the respiratory tract of an intact host have also shown,
as in the pathological studies described previously, that whole cigarette
smoke and certain of its subfractions are powerful ciliastats . Although
animal data on carcinogenesis or cocarcinogenesis are not extrapolatable
to humans, there are many instances where industrial ores, tars, and oils
(suspect on the basis of statistical data) have yielded biological data
comparable with those obtained with cigarette smoke . Institution of pre-
ventive measures based on these data concerning industrial materials
resulted in a decreased risk for the industrial population exposed . Thus,
precedents do,exist for the institution of preventives measures with
materials whose risk was first noted statistically and whose adverse
physiological action was then demonstrated biologically .
Irregardless of its interpretation, we have the following evidence :
(a) Statistics - both retrospective and prospective studies indicate

a significant association between cigarette smoking and certain
specific diseases .
(b) °athoioav - fluorescent cigarette smoke components are absorbed

by respiratory tract cellular components ; whole cigarette smoke
and certain of its subfractions . product metaplasia, hyperplasia,
and ciliastasis in experimental animals ; the extent of metaplasia ~
and hyperplasia in cigarette smokers is proportional to the ~
amount smoked . 6
Ln
~
w
00
58
carcino mES a_e 7rodL'C o d ~ :1 I'.ice,

and rabbits painted soht :.o-a o : ci ; ::rette s*:oi.e cor.densat4* ;
.^.a aCleaO r. .. .;.~8 ,L : 'vd u c e-
l i:i d in . .~c .°... -
rats,
c -__r .7 : :.e .°.L10iCe ; w11o1 e

•
Cla ar ette s~ :. ::e and ce rz C i , o= its S ::J :1LCti0 :S ,..1C p rol'otin g
agents and ci?iastats .
:i.uS , the answer to the G,i.es :~Jn

:.~' Jn ed p_eti
p os /',, ~ - :,,~~ e : u :- •
c~ ~ L ~• .~ . ..sxcal
ci~~
C vi Gf:nce
and L :+e ch ar..' c a ll evidence i. - o :.ae r s cJnsist en w :.th
thc _eoortad statistical . oatholo_ical, and biolotical data? may be
answored as follows :
The known composition of tobacco smoke is not inconsistent with the

statistical _inding that cigarette smoke may be associated with lung cancer,
heart disease, etc . Cigarette smoke contains polycyclic aromatic hydro-
carbons and asterocyclic nitrogern co :lpou nc:s - several of wnich are known
carcinogens ; phenols and fatty acids - several of which are known promoters ;
phenol, aldehydes and ketones, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide, ammonia -
all known ciliastats ; .nicotine and related alkaloids - many of which have
demonstrable effects on .the .cardiovascular system .

patizological .findings that fluorescent components of cigarette smoke are
absorbed .by respiratory tract,tissue, or that metaplasia and hyperplasia
are produced in the respiratory tract by cigarette smoke, or that ciliastasis
is produced by cigarette smoke . Cigarette smoke contains about a hundred
highly fluorescent components - the polycyclic hydrocarbons and the . hetero-
cyclic nitrogen compounds ; many of these will produce metaplasia and
hyperplasia and .even carcinomaìn experimental animals . Cigarette smoke
•
contains several known ciliastats .

biological findings that cigarette smoke is carcinogenic, cocarcinogenic,
and ciliastatic . Cigarette smoke contains at least a dozen polycyclic
hydrocarbons`known to be carcinogenic . It contains at least three
heterocyclic nitrogen compounds known to be carcinogenic . It contains
nitrogen oxides, which are known to be carcinogenic and emphysematogenic .
It contains arsenious oxide(As203), long suspected as a carcinogen ; it
contains polonium-210, and it very likely contains carcinogenic epoxides
and dialkylnitrosamines . Cigarette smoke also contains promoters like
phenol and many of its homologs and the saturated and unsaturated fatty
acids . It contains ciliastats like formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein,
ammonia, nitrogen dioxide, hydrogen cyanide, and the low molecular weight
carboxylic acids . N
w
~
A logical sequence for the activity of factors pertinent to the carcino-
genic risk accompanying the inhalation of 'carcinogenic aerosols and irritants
present in cigarette smoke and polluted air has been outlined . The ability
of the respiratory, tract to prevent the retention and accumulation of
foreign particulate matter,by means of ciliary action and mucus stream
*It has never been ascertained whether cigarette smoke condensate wDulL be
more or less carcinogenic if the volatile components (aldehydes, etc .),
lost during processing of the :. ;:zoke, were still present during the carcino-
genesis studies .
r ..Vl . _J _ ~ rrr . .r .. . . r. . .. rv . .rr .rr Vr . . . . .. . .rrr ._ ~ Vr Va. .rr . . .. ~~~inbs .
~G~ .1 : :~ _r . . ..s~ • ~ :~ . . .~ .rr ..~ . . . .. . .r~C1~~L . . ..~ . . r . . .:J11 .w~ . . . .._ C ..~1: ::J :: .. . .. .. . . .. : -, : :5
o : .rwrV.r ..V . .L :. ..v
\': ~r .Z irritants favors t .. c;-- r . .. . . .. .. o. C . . ..1. .: IZL .r.. . . Ll-: S pir .r..bVry
-
tr . :.V t . .
:.t crgaed that ..;:e c_ ben:;c[a ;pyrene or rs'~ :ious

;.
O :•. s mO::e is _ I:su : !'_ c :, eT.r :J LOc :+Lì.t - : Or the obSC r \'CL
..
ca .c i
r...dea
v ~.._ ~
, cr c~b~ e . -.
r•^~ ~~ ~~
s-o : :e . • _his,~oi cour
~c .e,. Ls • &.
t .ue : ~at ao
one has yat conducted the obvious e ::per : :::~a to determine waethcr the
amounts of t : e carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons plus the amounts of
the carcinogenic heterocyclic nitrogen co,:aour.ds plus the amount of arsenious
oxide plus the amounts of the cocarc :.nogenic phe ::ols and fatty acids are
sufficient to account for the.observed biological results . Calculation
has indicated that the kr.oc•m carcinogens and cocarcinogens in cigarette
snoke can account for about 90 percent of the observed activity . Such a
nixture could behave synergistically, additively, or ir.hibitively . It
is obvious that concern with the relative concentration in cigarette
smoke of one, or at most, of a few of the components is ridiculous . As
an absolute criterion of safety insofar as health is concerned, chemical
analysis of cigarette smoke, while highly suggestive, is physiologically
meaningless . The scientific community only accepts biological data as a
criterion of the healthfulness or harmfulness of a particular material .
The pharmacological properties, whether good or bad, of cigarette smoke
cannot be deter :ai ned fro .:~ chemical data which indicate the smoke from
Cigarette A contains more or less Carcinogen X, more or less Proa ;oter Y,
and more or less Ciliastat Z than the smaRte from Ciaarette B . The only
meaningful assessment of the relative tor:icity of the smokers from
different cigarettes is a biological assay .
Although it has not been attributed directly to the mounting evidence

on the health question, a gradual change in cigarette smoke has occurred
during the past ten years . For the first five or six years of this period
the amount of particulate matter in cigarette smoke was reduced by the
use of more efficient filter tip materials . More recently, efforts have
been directed toward a search for methods of removing specific components
or types of components from cigarette smoke with particular attention
being directed at present to the removal of promoters and ciliastats . Of
interest is the fact that the most successful results in selective fil-
tration - the use of Carbowax-type compounds to remove the cocarcinogenic
phenols, the use of the Keith charcoal filter'or other types of charcoal-
impregnated filter tip to remove the ciliastatic aldehydes - have arisen
where cOr^.lementarv chemical and 'cioloaical data were available .
Our chemical studies have shown that the concentration of specific

u,
smo ::e com:onents can be altered by specific treatment of the tobacco . ~_A
_j
1'.e ::c ::e and ether extraction of tobacco decreases the total polycyclic H
hydrocarbon and the benzo[aJpyrene content of cigarette smoke ; alcohol m
extraction decreases the total polycyclic hydrocarbons and benzo[a)pyrene Ln
~
but increases the phenol content of the smoke ; increasing the porosity of ~
the paper decreases the polycyclic hydrocarbon content of the smoke . m
vr p '. . L .. c 41Gr '..a .er
o . i.•r :;4:reLLa E'mJ :1e CiO ::'~oS :Llor. .

ra z _ :c:n o ::t in 11 956 r. ::d . 1 ; 5 7,
e .s rsr rS L . a b ;' i e .~. ..
cr
.. Vr 4r c o . .J~
:c
t~ :. ..ra:b ..ra :1
. .,-a ~ .: .. .°i t:J .r :aZ : ..rOr: S ~ ' rrrF LL.C.~~ ~•,. .5

7 : :3ao l . -
VJ V
o
?,r
r
.• : ..~
LLI :)
L
L.~.
a co
c
S
•
or h z or.lv^'.: : .n ; a ;entS _in ci g ar et .., . .^.J z !> C3n stressed i :: L : ;a c .7 :1-
to :'.:7 or i:ry 1 :.t er i.ttL' Cs . The concc :._ :' .: : iC n of ..̀ :iC: c,^.rcinoacnic p11)'C\' c lic
hyC.r oc .'t, rbons, r : :~ :: :.cu 1 .1r ly -, n Cia.^, . rz e :t•C S1 .'.oi :c has b v Oa
t '.it,.
~ SUJ,~~.
~=O^ .. t of i :1•-
. ..C ::ra ~~l~ @ study S :. - ..- e 1 ^ .:J . ^•.'le i~
~ •e S :11L 5 .'
of
,~ ~
.•Ur
. • ~
t . .. ..~. l l~.a...
c h e :.wcal stuLies on caa e:: ::_act_on of t ;.bacco ::ou :c: have suggestad that
the tobacco :a .ce derived fror: e:;tr a c : .ed tobacco had be e n ir.zp roved
irom the 73a L i .: viewp o int since extraction of t'r.e tobacco result e d in
a r e :ilct ;on of t he concentrE. l .on C t z at _east SC': e of t : e c .lrcinoSCnic
polycyclic hydrocarbons in the smoke . This appeared to be confirmed by
biological data (reported by other workers) on the carcinogenic activity
of the cigarette smoke from extracted and nonextracted tobaccos . However,
the decrease in caicinoger.icity o° the sr..o : ;e was generally less than the
decrease in the benzo[aJpyrene content of the smoke . The results of later
chemical studies ihdicated this improvement may not be so marked tecause
alcohol extraction of tobacco resulted in an increase in the phenol contentt
of the smoke . Let us compare the exposure oi a host to the cigarette smokes
frorm extracted and nonextracted tobaccos . As mentioned previously, the
biological data on the activity (carcinogenic and sebaceous gland sup-
pression) of the smokes indicated the smoke from the extracted tobacco
was less carcinogenic . But is the smoke from the extracted tobacco less
cocarcinoeenic when the host is exposed to this smoke together with
carcinogens from some other source, e .g ., polluted air? Our chemical
data suggest it is not .
Any change of the tobacco or the cigarette (extraction, tobacco

additives, filter tip materials, t :,lter tip addit-:.ves, paper porosity,
tobacco blend) will necessarily a :.ter the relative composition of the
tobacco smoke . How do we relate this composition change to the change,
if any, in the pharmacological properties of the cigarette smoke? For
what components of the cigarette smoke do we routinely analyze? Do we
determine the concentration of the carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons
(benzo[.k ;p ;.rene, dibenz[a,i]pyrer.e, and dibenz[a,hjanthracene), the
ca.cino~cr::c heterocyclic nitrogen compounds, the lactones, the cocarcino-
genic phenols, the cocarcinogenic fatty acids, the ciliastatic aldehydes
(formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein), or other pharmacologically active
smol:e components like carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen sulfide,
nitrogen oxides, arsenious oxide, nickel or nickel carbonyl, polonium-210,
dialkylnitrosamines, low molecular weight epoxides, and/or nicotine and
related alkaloids? A chemical analysis which indicates a decrease in the
concentration of each and every one of these components or groups of com-
ponents does not necessarily demonstrate, in any way, that the cigarette
is safer biologically to the host . Some smoke components not determined
may have increased in concentration to cause a totally unexpected effect .
At the risk of being repetitious - the only meaningful assessment ssmnt of the
relative toxicity of the smokes from different cigarettes is a biological
assay .
Ol
,,, . .
:/• .V. . .r .!
. i J .". . r .:S ,.~ s 0 r a r .ltI coii?OS«r .7 .: 0 ~ C2,ar, : .. ..t°, sôde, ..ne

~iG : ~e .'.C .:c?i. :
~. 1. :.~G :.'e :.te S :iJ :it? is a very cofir, Ca-ri .:l (50, 57, 5S') .
2. C-_*a ~ : a tt a sLloiCr° fro .i. any t :JacC :. C\'; Z o: Co Da cco blend cont .nans
c :6* C .^.obea.7.c co^ :7on2nz s (be ;lZo [ _:jp :"` a :: :, 1JDyr o :1e,
di'De : :2[a,b ] a:a::.acei: a , a~ :.e*.Z j _,l 1 c :lollnth rene,
benz[aJar.thracene, Ci :. b er :S.[ a, SJacridi :3 P d .a?a :iL_ ,}1 lacridine,
7a-dibenzo c,gJcarbazole) (11, 12, 13, 14, 15,1n, 20, 35),
cocarcinogenic components (phenols, fatty acids) (32, 38, 59),
c :liastatic com?onents (aldehvdzs and ketones, ammonia, nitrogen
oxides, phenols, hydrogen cyanide) (7, 8, 32, 38, 59), and
irrizants %'aldehydes, nitrogen oxides) (7, 8) .
3 . ' :Ze composition of cigarette smoke can be altered by the following

:.r eatr„ents .
a .- Pretreatr:ent of tobacco by solvent extraction : Solvent

extraction of tobacco reduces the polycyclic hydrocarbons
content of the cigarette smoke ; the extraction increases
the phenol content of the smoke (1, 11, 12, 13, 15, 32) .
b . PretreEtrent of tobacco b,~ the use of additives : Addition

of inorganic compounds like cupric nitrate to tobacco decreases
the polycyclic hydrocarbon and benfo[aJpyrene content of the
smoke (1$, 22, 29) . Addition of sulfur to tobacco increases
the polycyclic hydrocarbon and benzo[a1pyrene of the smoke (22) .
Addition to tobacco of organic compounds like sclareolide and
the salts of substituted malonic esters improved the cigarette
smoke flavor by increasing the concentration of flavorful
components in the smoke . Addition to tobacco of organic
compounds like solanesol, the saturated hydrocarbons, or the
phytosterols does not alter substantially the cigarette smoke
flavor, but does increase the polycyclic hydrocarbon and
benzo[ajpyrene content of the smoke (22) .
c . The choice of filter tiu materials : The composition of ciga-

rette smoke can be altered by the choice of filter tip materials
(15, 18) . Cellulose acetate and cellulose have different
affinities for the particulate phase and its components ;
charcoal, alumina, and silica gel, have different affinities
for the vapor phase and its components .
d . Pretreatment of filter tias : Certain compounds added to filter

tip materials can alter the composition of cigarette smoke ;
e .g ., agents. like 2,4,7-trinitrofluorenone or chloranil which
form stable complexes with polycyclic hydrocarbons when added
to the filter tip material reduce the polycyclic hydrocarbon
content of cigarette smoke (19, 30) ; various Carbowaxes on
filter tip material reduce the phenol content of cigarette
smoke .
62
G• ' cC = _
r .:e
'iao :, :co
zo*_ . .ccc 7 : a .^. z .. c .G C'
leaves fro :ri
ea :CL t e
•
rVi.s, .~'rr .. .r1Mr ~\, G1Yrt?r~Ry
CObc^..cc0 %-,+G's and i: : ~ :,Cr Cr. : *- i: :1dS ~1 ~ LJ b a^.c o t\'pa s `'` eld
cigarette smokes with d :_fere :: ; coc:po :: .t :o n s (11, 13, 13, 15) .
:
i . ?wner *)o_cs'rtv and ^dCej-~• .es : of

ci ;arette smo ::e a_tered by alterir.g zize porosity of
the cigarette , " nd/or tae use of an a :;r.i ;:ive such as
sodium and po :.assi~- cit_ates on tze paper
. Tobacco contains compounds V :ich ::aven been demonstrated to be

precursors of carcinogens ir. smol;e . Solanesol, the saturated
hydrocarbons, and the p :.ytosterois in =obacco are precursors of
various polycyclic hydrocarbons in s:r.oke (11, 12, 13, 15) ; nico-
tine in tobacco is a precursor of carcinogenic heterocyclic
nitrogen compound in smoke (35) . Plausible mecnanisms for the
formation of these two classes of co .-apounds from their precursors
have been advanced .
5 .. Tobacco contains compounds which have been demonstrated to be

precursors of the cocarcinogens (or promoting agents) in smoke .
Pectin, cellulose, and lignin .in tobacco are precursors of the
cocarcinogenic phenols in smoke (59) .
6 . Tobacco contains compounds which have been demonstrated to be

precursors of the ..ciliastats .in smoke . Cellulose and glycerol in
tobacco are precursors of ciliastatic aldehydes and ketones in
•
smoke . Cellulose in tobacco is also a precursor of phenol, a
known ciliastat,• in smoke (7, 8) .
7 . None of the chemical data acquired in our studies or in studies

conducted elsewhere is inconsistenz with reported biological,
pathological, or statistical data indicting cigarette smoke as
a health hazard .
8 . Although considerable data are available on the chemical composition

of cigarette smoke, much more data are required to define completely
both the chemical and physical nature of cigarette smoke (59) .
E . Rr.COr~~k'DATIOAS Lnr
I . Future Work ~'
During the period June, 1954 to May, 1963 many recommendations con-
cerning the study of cigarette smoke were made . Many of these recommendations
ware followed up by research which was subsequently reported . Some recom- ~
mendations, stili pertinent, are as follows :
1 . A : .l additives to tobacco should be tested biologically for their

adverse effect, if any, on a host (11a) .
.. . : J:
.
. C_rLvr ~ .. r . . ~y . .~. `_ .'i'.~
G .::t . . i :3 . . : ve alrc .':.CV ECC,L :iri:C and those d .3ta t•:::ic .^.
.',cC : iliri3 j : : .. : 2~ .. : u :e wi!_ .7e :i$a :a .^.5~~12_ 4I they are
. . . _ . r_ . . Vt .: Yl :t . . Sicsoorc ;.._ aG . .a (V, _3, _S, 59) .
4. A of . . . . ;) f y siCo - C : e :ac3_ of aerosols as they

J, ., :C. y
.:o to~a ..co s ::o ::e and its 'i_t:ation would be valuable .
(T ::_s stc :c:y is in progress) .
5 . The study of the compos__'_on of cigarette smoke by the isolation

and characterization o .-' _ts components should be reactivated as
soon as possible .
II . Patentabilitv
The patentability of various ideas and findings has been discussed

in the appropriate sections of our earl_er reports .
~.
Alan Rodgman:
Distr ;bution•
Mr . Kenneth H . Hoover
Mr . E . H . Harwood
Dr . Murray Senkus
Dr . Claude E . Teague, Jr .
Dr . Alan Rodgman
Library (2)
Dr . Fred T . Williams
First Draft Submitted : October 24, 1963
Completed : February 14, 1964

From manuscript :ww :pws
Approved :
,
,
04
:i~'' :.=~~ : ;'~.Y
i. . :ai c711r .., ' ::d R:odL : . ..' :, F . A . 1 :C, : . J . ReynJlds Tobacco Co .) r
''rocede dc : E : :.ement d4 =aba :. . = RIXC :. ?A Ti:\T N0 . 1,206,210
(Feb. S, 1y60) .
2 . COo'.., L . C . , and Rodgr.;,n, r:• , T ::e An" lvsis of Citar ette S ::zo ;cC
Condensate . }:.l'II2 . a- ar~.d 6-Levantanolide Tu : ki sh Tobacco
Sn:o :ce . RDR, 1961, No . 12 (Apr . 28) . .
3 . Cook, L . C ., anr: Rodgman, A ., T:^.e Co,::osition of Cigarette Smoke .

VIII . o'- and S-Levantenolide from Tu_ :cish Tobacco Smoke . TOBACCO
SCIENCE, 6, 32-33 (1962) .
4 . Cook, L . C ., and Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke

Condensate . XXV . 12a-Hvdroxv-13-evimanovl Oxide from Turkish
Tobacco Smoke . RDR, 1961, No . 44 (Sept . 22) .
5 . Cook, L . C ., Rodgman, A ., and'1'oung, G . W ., The Analysis of

Cigarette Smoke Condensate . XVI . Normal Lona-Chained Primar,y
Alcohols . RDR, 1960, No . 22 (July 1) .
6 . Cook, L . C ., Rodgman, A ., and Young, G . W ., The Comoosition of

Cigarette Smoke . VII . Normal LonR-Chained Primary Alcohols .
TOBACCO SCIENCE, 5, 6-10 (1961) .
7 . Fredrickson, J . D ., Chappell,C . K ., and Rodgman, A ., The Pre-

uaration of Reference 2,4-Dinitrovhenvlhydrazones for Ninety-one
Carbonyl Comoounds . RDR, 1956, No . 6 (Apr . 27) .
8 . Fredrickson, J . D ., Chappell, C . K ., and Rodgman, A ., The Analysis

of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . }LXX . Volatile Aldehvdic and
Ketonic Constituents . RDR, 1963, No . 12 (Feb . 8) .
9 . I'.od"man, A ., The Use of Potassium Bromate as an Oxidant to Convert

Carcinoeenic Hvdrocarbons to Noncarcinogenic Quinones . CIM, 1954,
No . 34 (Nov . 17) .
10 . Rodgman, A ., The Fractionation of Cigarette Smoke and Tar . RDM,

1955, No . 13 (Apr . 29) .
Ln
11 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . I . The ~
'l
Isolation and/or Identification of Polvcyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons ~
in CAMEL Cigarette Smoke Condensate . RDR, 1956, No . 9 (Sept . 28) . m
~
~
lla . Rodgman, A ., The Prevaration of Some Phenolic Flavorants . RDR, Al
1956, No . 10 (Oct . 1) .
12 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Ciaarette Smoke Condensate . II . The

Pretreatment of CA.*EL Blend Tobacco . RDR, 1956, No . 12 (Nov . 1) .
13 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Ciearette Smoke Condensate . III .

Flue-Cured Tobacco . RDR,,1957, No . 4(A:arch 14) .
•
65
3-7 ~ :,0 . ..3 •

" JCL . ~~ - -
_: . aa,
.= :! :-'C`? o= .- " a
. . . .' :E_y-. .. : : ~ '~: ~-L : .~ S ._ .a7 ~. : . ~V . VI . Tll t~.
7~~n
-_ ^V
:IV 1Ve aL _ ~. .. "~ .- . F- Vr i .L Jiv~.o -.4• •~~ 1 ~+ ..CLV• on
.C! 171L
YCo`~ . .V : : :. i~ rWr., ~i5
iG . Rodsman, a ., _ :z r._ C__=_et- S-o; :e Cozder.satC'. . LC .

P'r.vtadienes . R3:-, ?jL, -i
17 . . Rcd ;r.an, A ., _he Con.oosit :on oi Cica_ette Smol:e . III . Phvtadienes .

w . OR3 . CHEM ., 24, 1916- :.;24 (_959) .
18 . R:.dor:.an, A ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . X . The

r :: :ect of Porous Paoer and/or Filter TiD Materials or Aluminized
?sver and/or Alumina Additive fRevnolds Metals Cor .:oanv) on Total
Polvcvclic Hvdrocarbons . RDM, 1959, No . 80 (July 16) .
19 . P.odgman, A ., An Additive ::or Filter Tiv Materials . CIM, 1960,

No . 4 (July 13) .
20 . Rodgman, A ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . }:I}C .

_::e Determination of Pol .•cvolic Aro, :atic Hvdrocarbons . RDR, 1961,
No . 1 (Jan . 6) .
21 . Rod ;rzn, A ., The Ar.alvsis of Cigarette Smoke Condensate . XXXIII .

P :.lvcvclic Hvdrocarboi:s in Lark Cigarette Smoke . RAM, 1963, No . 37
(=~'Y 1~)~ •
22 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., T'.:e Ar.alvsis of Cigarette Smoke

Condensate . V. The Polvcvclic Hydrocarbon Precursors in Tobacco .
RDR, 1958, No . 18 (Dec . 1) .
23 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Ciearette Smoke

Condensate . VII . Solanesol and Solanesvl Acetate . RDR, 1958,
INo . 22 (Dec . 31) .
24 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Comoosition of Cigarette Smoke .

I . Solanesyl Acetate . T0MCC0 SCIEKCE, 3, 86-88 (1959) .
25 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analvsis of Cigarette Smoke

Condensate . XI . a-TocoDherol . RDR, 1959, No . 23 (Sept . 29) .
26 . :;odgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Cor:oosition of Cigarette Smoke .

_V . ^>.•.-Tocooherol . T03::CC0 SCIENCE, 4, 7-8 (1960) .
Ln
'27 . Rodgman , A . , and Cook , L . C ., The Analvsis of Cigarette Smoke ~
~
Condensate . XIII . Sclareolide from Turkish Tobacco Smo ::e . :.DR, N
m
1; 60, 'x o . 8 (Apr . 1) .
Ln
N
28 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke ~
m
Con ::er.sa _e . XIV . Polvcvclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons . RDR, 1960,
No . 20 ( ::ay 26) .
L N
.. ^ ~ r .
d .:, . .
::J !~
, .. . . .. v vy . :y .. . ~. . , . . . Z n !
v_S'i = 'L ti SI? Jia?
Co da t
11 »Ci Q
• S E ~~ E. .^.t r~ • .a4 m .4- -u 'TiV r .: (j
` CtMb : l v s .. .•!
on :.'o .`^' E 0 .^ : bo ` _ Jài Soi •Gs . a :^. :: .\I-Cotine .

RD.'t, =;u ;; . :;c . :,6 (Dec . 2) .
30 . Rodgma^., A ., and Cool: L . C . ,Aâ l-sis o : C ; ^ .1re*te Sr.:oke

Condensate . ?.VIII . C ::?o_F ::i1 and 2 .4 .7-__•i~nitrofluorenone as
Filter Tia Additives . C7 R, '900, No . 58 (Dec . 7) .
31 . Rod3 .~,an, A ., and Coc : :, L . C . ,=ra'vsis of C ; care`te Smoke

Condensat }^ : . ? ;ote on i:he Lc .a.-Chained Pri~r~arv
Alcohols : • An Aadendu :; to ?.DR . 1960 . N ;, . 22 . RDR, 1961, No . 5
(Jan . 26) .
32 . Rodgx.s.n, A ., :::.d Cook, L . C ., The Analrsis of C!__arette Smoke

Condensate . }:: ;I . Phenols . RDR, 1961, No . 10 (Feb . 23) .
33. Rodgman, ak ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke

Condensate . XXIV . 6-Acetv_-2 .3 .4-tris-d-B-methvlvalervl-6-D-
elucoovranJside from Turkish Tobacco S .;.oke . RDR, 1961, No . 42
(Aug . 18) .
34 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Coroosition of Cigarette Smoke .

X . 12o:-Hydroxv-13-euiraanol+l Oxide from Turkish Tobacco Smoke .
TO?ACCO SCIENCE, 6, 123-124 (1962) .
35 . Rodoman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke

Condensate . XA'ATI . Heterocvclic Nitroeen Comnounds from Turkish
Tobacco Smoke . RDR, 1962, No . 14 (June 21) .
36 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Comoosition of Cigarette Smoke

XI . Heterocyclic Nitro¢en Compounds from Turkish Tobacco Smoke .
Paper presented at 16th Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference,
Richmond, Virginia, September 26-28 (1962) .
37 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Comoosition of Cigarette Smoke .

XI . Heterocvclic Nitrogen Comoounds from Turkish Tobacco Smoke .
TOBACCO SCIENCE, 6, 174-177 (1962) .
38 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette•Smoke

Condensate . )MVII . Phenols from Turkish Tobacco Smoke : Eugenol Ln
and Isoeugenol . RDR, 1962, No . 15 (June 21) . ~-A
~
~
39 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke m
Condensate . }OZ1X . Phvtol (3,7,11,15-Tetramethvl-2-hexadecen-l-ol) . Ln
~
RDR, 1963, No . 9 (Feb . o) . ~
~
40 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Ci¢arette Smoke
Condensate . Z}•OCI . (x-1,5-Dimethvl-l2-isouroovl-9-methvlene-5 .8-
oxido-3,13-cvclotetradecadien-l-o1 and o:-12-Isopropvl-5,8-o ::ido-
1 .5 .9-trimethvl-3,9,13-cvclotetradecatrien-1-o1 from Turkish
Tobacco Smoke . RDR, 1963, No . 24 (Nlar . 25) . •
41 . Rodgman, A ., and Cook, L . C ., The Analysis of Cigarette Smoke
Condensate . XX1:II . Isoorenoid Alcohols . RDR, 1963, No . 35 (May 8) .
. -
.
at ~7t : T ;;-acc ; ~ :._ . . ._ ~s' .~~sc~rch
_. -23 J
`_iVJ)
~:J . . . . . . ., . .. :a, .. , and Cooa, .. . C ., 2,.L t - o^ ~• C :'7•'~~La.'.~.1• : S

.• .
.7 .~e .
ì Ur.sa_ura_ed A :.cohc ;.s frc- ?';:r : 's ;. Teb; ccc.~Sn•a' ; o . TO!1.CC0

7, .i. 3 1- 1 :r 7 ( ~96 .i~ . . .
/. !.
-r-r . ri . , and CoO : :, L . C . , The A.nalVSi S o f Ci_"YCt -e S .,7i :~',
C J1C. .?nS : r e . de :1G' ) -iS .7 D h0Y0^ a S ' r o :* Tul- k :.S.1
:'o~ 4a cco S : :o : RDcR in p :-epaYa-io n .
45 . Rodgman, A ., :;ook, L . C ., asllin, S . A ., rlims, S . S ., and Young,

G . td . , Tae Ar. ..lvs ; s of Ciearette Smoke Condensate . XXII . The
ar. :;lio :^.a :ic Ester Fractiorn from Tobacco and
^Jbacco Sr :,ice . RDR, 1961, No . 15 (Mar . 27) .
46 . :; :,dg .nan, A ., Cook, L . C ., Bellin, S . A ., Mims, S . S ., and Young,

G . W ., The Comoosition of Cigarette Smoke . M The Comoosition
c : an Aliohatic Ester Fraction from Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke .
Paper presented at 15t'r. Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference,
P ::iladelphia, Pennsylvania, October 4-6 (1961) .
47 . Rodgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., Bellin, S . A ., Mims, S . S ., and Young,

G . W ., The Cor, .oosition of Cigarette Smoke . IX . The Comnosition
of an Aliv'.:atic Ester Fraction ::rom Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke .
TOBACCO SC-6ENCE, 6, 42-49 (1962) .
48 . ::odgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Chappell, C . R . , The Analysis of

Cigarette S-:oi:e Condensate . V . Comoarisorn of Different Tobacco
TS es . RDR, 1960, No . 21 (June 30) .
49 . :.odgr.%an, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Chappell, C . K ., The Comuosition of

CiQarette Smoke . VI . Carmarison of Different Tobacco Tvoes .
Paper presented at 14th Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference,
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, October 13-14 (1960) .
50 . i.odgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Chappell, C . K ., The Comoosition of

C=2arette Smoke . VI . Cor.marison of Different Tobacco Tvices .
TOBACCO SCIENCE, 5, 1-5 (1961) .
51 . Rodgtr.an, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Latimer, P . H ., The Analysis of

C_sarette Smoke Condensate . VIII . Solanesvl Esters and Phvtostervl
Esters . RDR, 1959, No . 2 (Feb . 10) .
52 . Rodgman, A ., Cook, L . C ., and Latimer, P . H ., The Co :noosition of

C : . .arette Smoke . ?I . Solanesvl and Phvtostervl Esters . TOB.=.CCO
SCIENCE, 3, 125-128 (1959) .
53. TJ ;; ;man, A ., Cook, L . C ., and 'Mins, S . S ., The Analysis of Cifiarette

Condensate . XII . Saualer.es and Solanesenes . RDR, 1960,
:io . 3 (F eb . 10) .
O :)
1
> :. . . . ~ .:i. :, t`. . , CoOn,
~' ' C~te S :"J

_ . . := J Cii e :.._ ., z s'
1
L. C. , a .°.C
S .^•_ :i.G Si :
:, C:si.: :.. : c . . CO :
.. _.
'
. .- ::3iJ :-J :.:-C . ;,
ti 'Ji O~
:~o r .- :1
•
n
Q ::i o DeL 13 -a~i ~ ..i 6 G )
55 . :od^, ::ls:r., A ., Cook, L . C . , a ::d ._ . .s, S . S . , The Ca,::nosi zion o f

Ci •ârette S,:.oi:e . V . So :4 :lesr :zLs J . G RG . CHEM., 36, 497-501
(i;oi) . -
56 . Rodgman, A ., anc ?:e nz, W . i'] . , Co-~or.e^.ts ^•.evorted in Tobacco

Sra ::e . RJa., I c o0, No . 47 (May 27 ) .
57 . Rod ;man, A ., Aienz, W . W ., Huffr, .zn, F . E ., and Smith, E . N .

Co ;zonents Recorted in Tobacco Smoke . RDM, 1962, No . 43 (May 21) .
58 . Rodgman, A ., Menz, W . W ., and I:onstanti :.aia, G . A ., Comnonents

Reaorted in Tobacco Smoke . Suauiemer.t 's . Comoonents ReDorted
from May 1962 to S-)_ii 1963 . RDM, 1963, No . 32 (May 2) .
59 . Rodgman, A ., and Mims, S . S ., The Analvsis of Cigarette Smoke

Conaer:sate . )MVIII . Possible Precursors in Tobacco of Phenols
in Tobacco Smoke . RDR, 1963, No . 1 (Jan . 9) .
60 . Rowland, R . L ., Rodgman, A ., Schumacher, J . h ., Roberts, D . L .,

Cook, L . C ., and Walker, C,T . E ., Jr ., Macrocyclic Diterpenes .
Hvdroxvethers from Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke . Paper presented at
17th Tobacco Chemists' Research Conference, Montreal, P . Q .,
Canada, September 23-25 (1963) .
•
61 . Rowland, R . L ., Rodgman, A ., Schumacher, J . N ., Roberts, D . L .,
Cook, L . C ., and Walker, W . E ., Jr ., ~iacrocvclic Diterpene
Hydroxyethers from Tobacco and Cistarette Smoke . J . ORG . CHEM.,
?9, 16-21 (1964) .
ii96? À7I Atsnzqa3
uEUBpog ualy
Aals ol SS6T `t isn£n y :PajgQ
ÒOt-TSCiOt ` c c ~_- ~CC'c-TSGi?t ÌS-tOt£?t `COC-I : ;^rCI `CS-I~LSCI

009-IS_OOt Cv : :59~ . CC :- :S065'0 ` i
-TS96S0 ~ `COb-ICS/3C OC9-i05SCC °0c CS~
`CO£-IOZ ;+o Ocg-1ccZ9 `006-?Ccr±9 `.QOZ-'_c-~~ "0 S,--.=y<Lcc~
.
COi-0_ct£ coc- :e, cs_ ",t `CC
C<'.S ~_ s- ` -
:SC£S òe : =SC~ ~ `~s-
v :cc
L . J . . G
i~
s
~
Yo . J-:
.+J, . .J . i .~ . .
1 ; 55, Nos . 6, 9, a^d 12

*O:., : ; 57, \os . 4 and 13
:I.DR, 1. 95 B, \os . 18 and 22
RDi:, :. ; 39, \o . SO
: TJI., \os . ':., 2, 11, and 23
_950, \o . 47
RDR, :;00, Nos . 3, 8, 20, 21, 22, 36, and 38
Chi ; 1950, No . 4
RDR, 1961, Nos . 1, 5, 10, 15, 21, 42, and 44
RDDf, 1962, a\To . 42
RDR, 1962, Nos . 14 and _5
F,DM, 1963, Nos . 32 and 37
RDR, 1963, Nos . 9, 12, 15, 24, and 35
•
Alan Rodgman
February 14, 1964

, CONFIDENTIAL kj ()
f .
f
R !4 D LONG-RANGE PLANNING
SMOKING AND HEALTH: PROt1UCT AND St4OKE COMPONENTS
Dr. Alan Rodgman

FC Director of Research
October 8, 1976
. .;.r .. .~..__. ..
:.3' - . .C: . . .. .. . . .•V.~- . . . .1 . .. . . . . . .
. :~.:: :.:,•~• . . : s. :' . r : .~ ., .,~.. . .. . . . . •r . . : . . = .a . . ; ;
INTRODUCTORY NOTES
On the following pages is presented a discussion of Key Issues

for long-range planning in the area of Smoking and Health,~ :_ Product
and Smoke Components .
In reading this n:inuscript, the reader should be aware of the
following :
(1) The author does not necessarily agree with or accept
any or all of the data, claims, statements, allegations,
etc ., advanced by proponents of the smoking-health
theory with regard to the components considered .
ENO (2) For each product or smoke component, the bleakest

possible outlook has been presented•. In many •
instances there are substantial data to contradict
some or all of the claims advanced by proponents
, of the smoking-health theory .
(3) For most of the product and smoke components . I
have included in the discussion the use of such
~A"' as " . . .proponents claim . . .," " . . .proponents
c~ ~~+nn . . . . . " . . . Proponents allege . . .," " . . .proponents
• ~f~`#~ t . . . ." " . . .the alle9ed activities . . . ." " . . .the
• ;Xlaiiped properties . . .," etc. In parts of the
ssion where I may have inadvertently omitted
.'41M•qualtfying words or phrases, their presence
* be underbtood by the reader . •
(4) 1YR7references cited in each of the position
s should be considered as representative .
ome sc~oke or product components such as
nic0tine, "tar", or carbon monoxide there are
hundreds of references available .
(5) Several product or smoke components are-discussed
In the introductory text but do not appear in a
Position Paper or in the Key Issue tabulation .
These were included for the sake of completeness .
%o
V, , R2,236
/
R & D LONG-RANGE PLANNING

.
SMOKING AND NEALTfi : PRODUCT AND SM0KE COMPOtiENTS
MISSION STATEMENT
• To define those components in the Company's products and/or in the smoke
from the Company's products which will be implicated either positively or
negatively in the smoking-and-health controversy .
r, It is anticipated that past and present trends to indict various components
ojjtobacco products and/or their smoke as contributors to ill health will
ntinue till 1989 but at a highly enhanced level during the decade 1979-1989 .
~• Past and present indictments will continue .in the future to concern not only
direct exposure of the smoker to the components of the mainstream smoke
~ '" at wchih isnhaeut
ild) asoblhtenrectidiexposure of the nonsmoker or .
ker cohort to the components of environmental smoke . Environmental smoke •
defined as the sum of the sidestream smoke (the smoke liberated to the
sphere between puffs) plus that portion of the mainstream smoke exhaled
the smoker . •
Attacks will be mounted against proprietary and other flavorant systems,
sing formulat , .•'etc
. whose. components appear on the GRAS list which was
generated prima y to permit inclusion of various materials in edible or
~• osmetic produc, he GRAS list in general does not cover inhalation of
` se com?oundmor .eir decomposition products generated during the smpking
,~cess"
~ .•
also likely that certain product or smoke components*now
nera%ons ~ snfe, or at least not indicted as harmful, will eventually
considered l because of the acquisition of new information on their
hysiological pr :ties . .
4It is visuali2 d that claims concerning a given component may be viewed
s either an "opportunity" or a "threat" or in some cases, both an "opportunity"
nd a "threat" ; e. g ., some health authorities may claim (as some already have
one) that the nicotine level of the smoker should be increased to satisfy the
moker's physiological requirements and deter him from inereasing his consumption
f low-"tar" cigarettes . This presents an "opportunity" to the first company
hich attains a realistic goal of a"tar" :nicotine ratio substantially less than
0 . This concept may also be a "threat" since other health authorities may claim
hat both nicotine and "tar" should be reduced simultaneously to the eventual
__ eaninn aoint . . .
To combat the anticipated situation with regard to the components .of
Compa•iy products and•their smoke, R & 0 will need the following : '
1 . Increased awareness and intelligence on the activities .
of various governmental agencies (NCI), medical
societies (Americtn Cancer Society), and popular
~. . .:, ~
,
2
I
publications (READER'S DIGEST) devoted to the
curtailment and elimination of the smoking
habit .
2 . Logical anticipation of which components,
either product or smoke, will be indicted
and the sequence of their indictment .
3 . Increased staffing with highly competent
people, acquisition of appropriate instrumentation,
and generation of advanced technology to quickly
and accurately answer any or all claims against
a specific component . (It would be highly
desirable to have the necessary answers in hand
or to the time an attack is mounted against
griTven component) .
:4 . Alternative product components to replace those indicted and for which no satisfactory rebuttals
are available or forthcoming .
The numbe nown components (excluding propriEtary flavorants) in the

ou~pany's tobacn ~òducts exceed 1200 while, that for smoke exceeds 2300 .
r~er f th se c ponents are cortmon to both tobacco and smoke . For smoke,
t is te the number of known components is less than 10% of those
ctu .a~,1 : ~r~, ese ,
Kher~ thes ers are considered, it is obvious that no detailed account
n be given of 'total known composition of smoke and/or tobacco in terms
f anticipated g=term indictment of all the specific smoke or tobacco
Jitherebesindic%ted or 5ebtheisub3ectiofsconsiderablenworkaandsadwhich versewill

iscussion between 1976 and,1989 .
A brief discussion of these areas and their status as ofOctober ' 1976
oltows .
~.
i
,
s
TABLE I
. ' PRCDUCT AND ShiOKE COMPONENTS
I . SMOKING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT CONPONENTS

A . Filler
1. Tobacco Types •
2. Processed Tobacco Products
3. Tobacco Substitutes
4. Nicotine
5. Casing Tlaterials'
a . Sugar
b . Licorice
c . Cocoa
d . Glycerol and Other Humectants
6. Flavorants
7 . Contaminants
a. Pesticides •
b. Dust and Sand
Materials .
Additives
!lasticizers
« lavorants
F5
C . Paper
~ 1 . Paper'AddStives : Dyes
~ SMOKING AND HEALTH : SMOKE COMPONENTS

.
.A . Mainstream vs Sidestream Smoke

B . Environmental Smoke
C . Smoke Phases and Their Components
1 . Particulate-Phase Components
a . FTC "Tar" I
b . Nicotine
c. Pesticides
d. Polycyclic Hydrocarbons
imw
.
. e. J•te tal l tc Components

i . Polonium-210
ii . Cadmium
f. Nitrosamines
2 . Gas-Phase Components
a. Carbon Monoxide
b. Nitrogen Oxides
c. Hydrogen Cyanide
d. Hydrogen Sulfide
e. Other
D. Smoke "Stran ers" Generated b Uni uel Processed TobaccoProducts

~Un gi- u~ eFil er an ter avorant ystemc, an , n que aper pye
S,ys tems
I . Tr~atco f;~MPG MYS I
Tobacco yyoe
8efore 1989 flue-cured'may be indicted as a smoking-health

hai.ord and recom~endations for its removal from tobacco products
be odvbnced .
8ecause of the high incidence of respiratory tract cancer at

no,,,,f nal per capita consumption of smoking products, it is alleged
tho't flue-cured tobacco (by far the major tobacco component of all
~U, r . Products) is a major contributor to respiratory tract cancer
in the U• K . These allegations are based on vital statistical ~>
~ Wa which are interpreted to show that the death rate frcm
O reoPirdtory tract cancer is much higher in the U . K, than in the
~ U, 5 . A . at essentially the same per cigarette consumption . Pro-
po,f,ants of the smoking-nealth theory claim that dilutiori of flue-
cur ed tobacco with burley, Maryland, Turkish, and G7-type' stem
shoet In the American brand lowers the smoke carcinogenicity and :. . .m. ;:. ::
~ thts dilution explains the lower incidence of respiratory tract
carir.er In the U . S. A . vs the U . K .
OVO
~ ~~~ponents of flue -cured tobacco alleged to be ~"
re4qoR`1for the activity of the smoke are the waxes
~(a1 e9 cursors of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons)
anil t~6 s ars . Also, flue-cured tobacco usually generates
~ ~ ~.On Ac raoke which is more readily inhalable than a more
;.ba4rc = e . Flue-cured differs markedly from burley in its ' :•;: ~`
~~~#iiuh ~~ ~bX} level of sugar vs a very low level (clx) in ~ .
b~rley~~~. I .A .S .a .) . The difference in wax content of the
tNn c toGa s is not particularly y pronounced . :
3, 2 . Pr ces~sed .Tobacco
. Products
F or more than a decade it has been known that inclusion
of stem materials (usually in sheet form) in a cigarette blend
~ dporea :es the alleged specific activity of smoke condensate in
~~ Moiise skin-painting experiments . . From 1950 to 1970 the percent
ini'lusion of stem materials in cigarette products throughout <k~ `
~ tht+ Affierican industry gradually increased, arod at the same time,
thh alleged specific activity and the benzo(aagyrene content of
th is S mo ke from such products gradually decreased .
~ :: L„
In additional experiments conducted by NCI from 1970 to•1973,
~ it was alleged that G7-typra sheet a :aterials (high stem content) ~
m,nufactured by Schweitzer and At•S&F showed some apparent advantage m
ovar CUt tobacco filler in specific carcinogenicity in mouse '• 3L,
sklii-Painting experiments . The Company has used G7 at a grccually Ln
iil, rea .ing level for over 25 years and thus provided products ~ .hose oD
sn,nkes . according to the thesis adti'Mnctai by some smoking-health pitipon6nfs, would alleqedly be lowor in
:iamr.ialian skin carcinogznicity o
than those of its competitors . Much of this alleged advantage has ~
bpan lost to the Company as each competitor developed and used its
a ~ n~ ~n proprietr.ry sheet m.aterial . ' "
«.
~
6
#4
4
The concern or "threat" here is the fact that G7-type sheet
materials in general generate higher levels of certain smoke
• gas-phase components than does cut tobacco filler . These gas-phase
components, because of their volatiiity, are not involved in mouse
skin-painting tests with smoke condensate . It probably will be
claimed before 1985 that excessive exposure of the respiratory
tract to such gas-phase components impairs the respiratory tract
defense mechanisms (ciliary and/or macrophage activity) against
"tar" elimination . Pres,:nt evidence suggests that at nominal
exposure levels, much of these indicted gas-phase,components
are "scrubbed" out of the smoke stream by upper respiratory tract
(mouth and throat) secretions . However, excessive levels of
these gas-phase components generated from high level inclusion
of stem material in the smoking product may saturate the
upper respiratory tract "scrubbers" thus permitting these
E no
components to reach the lower respiratory tract (lung) .
The results of experiments conducted by NCI on three
..types of expanded tobacco (RJR (expanded with Freon 11),
PP1 (expanded with ammonia/carbon dioxide), NCSU (expanded
by freeze-drying with water)) and the results of experiments
contracted to IBT by RJR on its G13-expanded tobacco
demonstrated in each case that the smokes from the expanded
toba ~ossessed slightly less specific activity (but
not ~~aA'°.ì••ficantly so) ir. mouse skin-painting than did the
smogisixon a control, nonexpanded tobacco . In a macrophage
actf~ity inhibition study, the RJR G13-expanded tob~+cco smoke
004 sh ed 1 s inhibitory effect presumably due to lower levels
of g ase components than did the control tobacco smoke .
•Thes 'logical findings are in accord with detailed smoke
co on studies conducted by RJR . .
'RJR proprietary expanded tobacco is the only one
of 'three wf .ich. introduces 'into the smoke an unnatural
componen or "stranger," .Freon 11 .' Although this is present
at very low levels, future indictments of Freon 11 in a
health and/or environmental situation may seriously compromise
our use of this expansion agent .
3. Tobacco Substitutes
Several tobacco substitutes are now available in the
market . The two most important are Celanese's Cytrel and
ICI's NSM . Within the projection period, a tobacco
substitute such as these will be used successfully in the
U. S. A . to control smoke composition as a health-related
measure . '
The development within the Company of the substitute
J10, a puffed grain, will permit rapid response by RJRT to
this situation when it occurs . J10 offers several advantages O
CO,
O
D
CA10
r
RJR24242 N
,
7
.
over Cytrel and NSNI ; namely, the original R & 0 costs of
J10 are less than 10% of those expended by Celanese and
,
ICI, no royalty payments are needed since J10 is an in-house
. developed and patented product, the raw material cost for
J10 and the cost of manufacture are much less than those
for Cytrel and NStd, J10 has an expanded structure and
volume-for-volume replacement of tobacco by J10 is about
a 1 :3 replacement on a weight-for-weight basis, J10 on
admixture with tobacco introduces no "strangers" into the
smoke, and the present status of a biolcgical study on J10
smoke condensate in a mouse skin-painting experiment
indicates no problem . (This study will be completed by
the end of the 3rd quarter, 1977) .
Should the situation arise in that the consumer
desires a tobacco substitute in his cigarette, the use
of J10 by RJRT presents a real "opportunity" from both
an economic and a smoking-health point of view . '
A ._ Nicotine ,
Nicotine in tobacco products may be subjected to two
s by proponents of the smoking-health theory :
Because of claims that nicotine is allegedly
involved in cardiovascular problems, to
decrease nicotine in the product so that
reduced levels of nicotine will appear in
the smoke. •
. . To increase nicotine in the smoking product
I so that increassd levels of nicotine will
appear in tht. smoke at a lowered "tar"
E delivery, thus satisfying the smoker's
physiological requirements at a lower
level of "tar" intake . Part of this
physiological satisfaction can be
accomplished by control of smoke pH but •
this approach has definite limitations .
Solution of a . is the simpler since "tar" and nicotine
usually parallel each other in the smoke since nicotine is a
particulate-phase or "tar" component . Systems such as blend,
filtration, air dilution, paper porosity employed to lower
"tar" delivery usually lower uicotine delivery by roughly the
same percentage .
Another facet of a . is the recent and consistent indication
in studies conducted by NCI on three series of experimental
cigarettes that the specific carcinogenicity of smoke condensate
in mouse skin painting is proportional to the nicotine content
of the condensates .
RJR24243
.I
8
I -
Solution of b . presents a real challenge : to increase

• the nicotine content of smoke while maintaining or lowering
the "tar" delivery . Possible ways to accomplish this include :
the use in the blend of high levels of high-nicotine tobacco
(usually not readily available in quantities needed), enhancement
of the nicotine content of the blend by addition of nicotine
salts, development of a unique air dilution-filtration system
to lower "tar" levels but not nicotine levels (a highly unlikely
concept) . .
. The use of added nicotine salts requires a suitable source'

U of nicotine in its natural configurationa . Possible sources ,
include : synthesis (problem here is that unless a stereo-
h specific synthesis is available, 60% of product is in the

unn2tural configuration, hence is unusable), extraction of
nicotine from specially grown, generally nonusable tobaccos
~ such as Rustica, genetic development (probably requiring 5

years •o gf eneM work) of high-nicotine . low-"tar" delivery
tobaccos, biosynthesis of nicotine by specific microorganisms,
recovery of nicotine at all process points involving heating
of tobacco throughout the Company . The latter presents the
bestt "op~ortunity" . Each drying operation in our tobacco
.g line decreases the nicotine content about 5%, 613
reduces nicotine content, etc . PH, in its new
n Richrr.ond, recovers all volatile effluents and
. ~. .,_---- them to recover both the tobacco flavorants and
which then are returned to the Pti products .
g Haterials
major casing materials (sugar, licorice, cocoa,
hw~ rits) have a long history of use in tobacco products .
Unticently, no serious question was raised or evidence
obtained on their involvement in the smoking-health issue .
However, within the past few years, health claims against sugar
and cocoa in the blend have appeared . It is, however, anticipated
that these claims may become more serious during the projection
period . As "tar" and nicotine numbers have been reduced by
blend adjustment, use of porous paper, use of improved filter
and air dilutfon systems, etc ., future attention will be
directed to those items previously considered minor in comparison
but which will eventually attain an important place tn thg
smoking-health issue .
.
These casing materials, presently acceptable according to•
the GRAS list for ingestion and/or cosmetic use, present '
diverse problems when their inhalation or inhalation of their
decomposition products is considered .
~
a Nicotine, as does menthol, exists in two isomeric forms . 0
0
In each case, one isomer occurs naturally, the other does not . a
r
t11
RJ R24244 a
a
. ,• , . :. .
y
,
.; .
. ..
a . Sugar
As noted previously in I•A•1, the sugar content
of flue-cured tobacco is alleged to be in part the
tobacco component whose decomposition products are
responsible for the higher carcinogenicity of the
smoke from flue-cured cigarettes over that of the
smoke from a blended cigarette . The evidence for this
is primarily statistical, e . g ., higher 1ung .cancer
death rates in U . K. where wholly flue-cured cigarettes
are smoked vs lower lung cancer death rates in the
U. S . A. and elsewhere where blended cigarettes are
smoked.
This epidemiological evidence appears to be
confirmed by biological studies (mouse skin painting)
which show that the specific carcinogenicity of -
flue-cured smoke condensate is substantially greater
than that of the smoke condensate from Maryland or
burley dnd essentially the same as that of Turkish
.tobacco smoke condensate . Turkish, like flue-cured,'
has a high sugar content, averaging about 10% .
ver, an NCI study in the 3rd Series of cigarettes
icated that neither sugar nor humectant added to
experimental control blend affected the specific
cinogenicity of the smoke condensate, but sugar •
s hunectant did correlate with higher seecific •
cinogenicity . Sugar added at the 5x level also
reases the "tar" and nicotine delivery of a
en tobacco blend .
Results of studies conducted in-house indicate
t the sugar levels in Compar~y products could be
subistantially reduced without serious impairment
of smoking qual i ty .
b . Licorice
Licorice was originally used in chewing tobacco
and its use was transferred to pipe tobacco and
subsequently to cigarette tobacco . It imparts a
certain sweetness to the smoke . Its active ingredient
is glycyrrhizin, a salt of the triterpenoid glycoside,
glycy rrhizic acid . Neither of these has been detected
to date in smoke . It has been speculated that during
combustion glycyrrhizic acid can form carcinogenic
polycyclic hydrocarbons such as benzota) pyrene from
the triterpene moiety and phenols from the sugar
inoieties . To date, the only evidence in partial
support of this claim is that pipe tobacco containing
high levels of licorice (and thus glycyrrhizic acid)
yielded substaotially higher levels of oenzo[alpyrene
than did cigarette tobacco smoked under identTcal
conditions .
9's R2ak"
10
It is anticipated that at some time during the

. projection period governmental regulations may require
the listing on the label of the leyel of licorice
in the smoking product . This would necessitate
Company compliance, the use of an alternative to
licorice, abandonment of its use, or generation of
data to show that the premise for labelling is
invalid .
The labelling regulation is viewed as a""threat",

the discovery of a successful alternative as an
"opportunity" .
c. Cocoa
In a recent study by NC1, results in a mouse •
skin-painting experiment indicated that inclusion•of
1% cocoa in the experimental blend increased the
specific carcinogenicity of the smoke condensate
obtained therefrom .
Regulations to label for cocoa content of the
~ing product would result in compliance by the
,mpany, replacement of cocoa with a suitable
• rnative, abandonment, or generation of data to
rsho)y that the premise for labelling is invalid .-
;Glycerol and Humectants •
It is anticipated that during the projection od two events will occur

; namely, a smoking-health
m will be levelled at one or more humectants and/or
decomposition products in smoke, and a regulation
wil be proposed requiring the listing of such added
ingredients on the-label .
The NC1 study on the 3rd Series of cigarettes
demonstrated w':;.t glyccrol added to the control blend
had no effect on specific activity in'mouse skin-painting
of the smoke condensate but sugar plus glycerol did .
All other evidence from 1960 to date suggests that
humectantsdo not play a significant role in tobacco
smoke carcinogenesis .
6 ._ Flavorants
The use of additives to enhance tobacco flavor was criticized
more than ten years ago on the basis that possible prectirsors of
irritants and/or toxic substances were being introduced into the
smoking article . It was also pointed out that the pyrolysi :
a
0
0
~
R J R24246
/
11
4
products in the smoke from cigarettes containing such flavorants

are rarely tested in biological assays . From this, the question
was raised : Should not such flavorants be subject to regulation
by governmental health authorittes as are artificial food
fiavorants?
Within the projection period, the use of flavorants - even
proprietary flavorants - on tobacco products will be attacked
on a greater scale as contributors to the alleged adverse
properties of tobacco smoke . In general, proprietary and other
flavorants added to Company products fall into two classes :
They are known components of tobacco and are added to enhance a
specific flavor characteristic or they are on the GRAS list
which, as mentioned previously, is a list of compounds considered
safe for ingestion or use in cosmetics . The GRAS list in
general does not cover inhalation of the listed compounds or
their decomposition products produced during the smoking
9. process . '
Awareness of this situation ts already evident in that
NCI has already contracted a study on flavorants .to A . D: Little .
Proposals for future work by NCI include inhalation studies
on s e enerated from tobacco treated with a variety of
know • cco flavorants .
f the Company's proprietary and patented Turkish-type
flav 'rant have tremendous potential economic ad'vantage to the
ompa articularly as the cost of Tur'a sh tobacco continues
77to es• 1•e . One of these is a known component of Turkish
oba nd its use will probably present no serious'problem7 rhe , N13, is structurally similar to a sugar ester
isola rom Turkish tobacco but to date, N13 has not been
demo ted as a Turkish tobacco component. Demonstration of
thc*,,res~ce of M13 in Turkish tobacco is an "opportunity" to
protect the Company's right to use this flavorant in the face
of future regulations and to preserve the economic advantages
inherent in the use of M13 . '
7._ Contaminants
a . Pesticides
Various pesticides have been banned from use •
on tobacco plants over the past several years . .
Those permitted at the present time may, at seme '
time in the future, be banned on the basis of some ,
environmental or health-related hrzard such as •
occurred in the banning of DDT (concentration of
DDT in mammalian fatty depots and liver) . Usually
it requires years for soil once impregnated with a specific
4A
0
0
~
2-1
R~R242
- .o
.,•.. . y ~ , ~ _ 4s •
.. . . ., . ..- . ~- ~' . :l . . . :
./
12
t
pesticide to become essentially depleted of the
pesticide . As a result the pesticide appears in
subsequent years' crops of tobacco even though the
banned pesticide is no longer in use . Post pesticides
are transferred intact to some degree from the
tobacco to the snooke during the combustion process .
This will probably present no problem with the
sale of the Company's domestic products but may
present a problem in international products
marketed in some European countries such as Hest
~Germany where pesticide residue regulations are
very strict .
b. Dust and Sand•

FRO This is not precisely a problem with the
Company's flroducts but is a health-related problem
in the work areas where Company raw materials are
processed (stemmery, blending, etc .) . The Company
has diligently followed OSitA regulations to control
sand and dust levels in the work areas, but it is
anticipated that these regulations will become even
Wk* demanding during the period 1976-1989 .
t~, •4 B . Fi 1 tet
l .- .~~ Materials
use of the traditional filtration material, cellulose
acet• , ill continue through the projection period . Nowever,
increa emphasis on gas-phase components such as aldehydes,
hydr eyanide, hydrogen sulfide, etc ., may result in the
design a d ~tilization of more efficient carbon filters .
Carbon, of course, does not absorb either carbon monoxide or
nitric oxide, the predominant (>98x) component of the nitrogen
oxides . . •
.
2._ Filter Additives
a . Plasticizers
Since every plasticizer•currently used on a
filter tip Is entrained to some•dEgree in the smoke
stream and thus appears in the mainstream smoke
inhaled by the smoker, claims concerning the
hazard of these components will appear during the
projection pericd . The plasticizer most commonly
used in the American tobacco industry is triacetin .
which, on exposure to smoke and entrainment in the
smoke stream, does react to form diacetins and
13
.
, monoacetins plus acetic acid, an alleged ciliastat and

inhibitor-of macrophage activity (impairment of
respiratory tract defense system) . The filter-tiN
suppliers will probably deal with this type of problem
and the development of alternate plasticizers .
However, the effects of alternate plasticizers on smoking
quality will require detailed evaluation within the
Company,
b . F1Avorants
Most flavorants added to filter-tip materials
are transferred unchanged to the smoke stream and
appear in the mainstream smoke . Decomposition
F=* products, such as are Inevitable with flavorants
added to the tobacco filler, are of little concern
here . The major concern is that most filter-tip •
flavorants, while on the GRAS list, have not been
cleared for inhalation . The work proposed by NCI
to examine In an Inhalation system the effects of
•tobacco flavorants•and their decomposition products
in test animals may eventually result in indictment
~~pnTy of some tobacco flavorants but also some
1; a
er-tip flavorants .
. ape~
jPaeer Additiv_es :_ Dyes

If the Company develops new smoking articles which
i~ude a dyed paper system, then detailed investigation
he effect of the dye system on smoke composition
be required to answer the question : Does the dye
system contribute "strangers" to the smoke? : Fortunately,
we are in an excellent position technologically to
perforni this type of comparison study . We can compare
the smoke composition from a control and a test cigarette for over 1800 smoke components to determine
the presence of "strangers" .
Two such studies have•already been carried out to
investigate the contribution of the WINCHESTER paper
dye system and several MORE paper dye systems to smoke
composition with a clear demonstration that no smoke
"strangers" were generated . At present, it is unlikely
that apy.other laboratory can perform this type of
study as rapidly or as accurately as we can . However,
the time may come .when technological advances elsewhere
will permit'others to duplicate this or to extend it
to a greater number of compounds present at very low
levels in the smoke . One research objective is to
assure that we can define smoke (or tobacco) composition
to a greater degree than anyone else .
, ~, I R2ao
in
t
SMOKINC AND HEALTH : SMOKE COtiPONEtiTS ,
A . Mainstream and Sidestream Smoke
Mainstream smoke is that smoke generated during puffing and is

inhaled by the smoker . Sidestream smoke is that generated during the
nonpuffing or free-burning part of the smoking . Sidestream and
mainstream smoke are qualitatively the same but differ substantially
quantitatively ; e' g ., both smoke streams contain carbon monoxide,
nicotine, nitrogen oxides, ammonia, benzola) pyrene, etc ., but the
mainstream vs sidestream yield per cigarette varies widely depending
on the component . The levels of some components in the sidestrean
are a bou t th ree t imes the l eve l i n the ma i nstream smo k e ; for oth ers,
the ratio of sidestream:mainstream levels may be as high as 10 or 15 .
FOO, B . Environmental Smoke
Environmental smoke is that smoke to which a nonsmoker or a
nonsmoking smoker is exposed when in close proximity to a smoker in
the act of smoking It consists of the sidestream smoke evolved by
the smoking article between puffs plus that portion of the mainstream
smoke exh~~~y the smoker . Thus for a given room volume, environmental
smoke wil dependin ; on the number of smokers in the act of
smoking, ~ .'particular smoking habits such as puff volume, puff
frequency pu duration, nuqiber of puffs per cigarette, degree of
inh~latio~i, et . . clus the degree of ventilation in the given room .
he is on environmental*smoke will increase substantially
WMg th y part of the pro3ection period (from 1976 to 1980)
as propon f the smoking-health, theory continue their attenpts to
combat smok *by depicting it as a"dirty" habit which not only is
harmful e`participant in the smoking act but also has a harmful
(and annoyin effect on persons - whether smoker or nonsmoker -
in close proximity to the smoker.
This aspect of the smoking-health problem must be viewed as a
real "threat" to the tobacco industry in general and RJRT in
particular . Even the increase in market share of low-"tar" cigarettes
projected for the next decade will not detract from the attack on
environmental smoke . The quantity of sidestream smoke is not
substantially reduced by blend adjustment, unique filtration or air
dilution systems, paper porosity adjustment used specifically to
produce a 1ow-"tar" cigarette . . .
The claims will increase in magnitude by the smoking-health
proponents' stressing that the nonsmoker is involuntaril exposed•
to a host of allegedly hazardous compounds inOuding car on monoxide,
nicotine, benzota~pyrene, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide and
sulfide, aldehyd-es, acids . The health condition (such•as allergy,
cardiovascular strength or weakness, respiratory tract condition)
of the nonsmaker so exposed will be stressed as well as the effect 0
~
..
a
0
0
R~R2425~
15
•. .
on his particular condition of involuntary exposure to thc :se

~ allegedly harmful smoke components ; e . g ., a person with a chronic
cardiovascular condition, it will be claimed, may be pushed over
the brink of a cardiovascular incident by his involuntary exposure
to carbon monoxide and/or nicotine .
C. Smoke Phases and Their Components

Cigarette or pipe smoke is an aerosol consisting bf small liquid
spheres or droplets suspended in a gas stream . The spheres are the
~ particulate phase of smoke, the gas stream is the gas phase . At
present there are about 1950 parti :ulate-phase components known
and about 400 gas-phase components . The definition of the co~ osition
of the gas-phase is almost complete but it is estimated that the
Eno number of components known in the particulate-phase represents only
about 10% of the total present . About SO components are co ;nnon to
both smoke phases, water and phenol being two examples .
1 ._ Particulate:,Phase ComQonents
a . FTC "Tar"
While not a component er se but a complex
~€:i~A,#re, we will consider tFeFT "tar" as a
7component. The FTC "tar" from a cigarette .
ismok~d under standard conditions is defined ,
e weight of total particulate matter .
the weight of nicotine and water . Because
tar" contains many components (certain
cyclic hydrocarbons, their nitrogen analogs,
samines, metals, lactones, phenols) alleged'
b•e harmful to the smoker, the smoking-health
cla~ against "tar" will continue unabated during
the projection period despi te the fact that 1ow-
"tar" cigarettes will command an increasing share
of the market . tlany smoking-health proponents
will push inexorably for lower and lower "tar" .
values and the accompanying decrease in nicotine
until the smoking population in effect weans itself
from smoking . This must be considered a serious
"threat" .
b . Nicotine
The future controversy concerning nicotine in
smoke will involve two separate premises by
proporrents of the smoking-health theory : One group
of proponents will claim that nicotine in smoke •
together•with "tar" should be lowered progressively
if not immediately and thus wean smokers from the
smoking .habit . The second group of proponents will
R S R24251
NNW
16
0
claim that, since people will continue to smoke

to obtain the nicotine physiological satisfaction,
the nicotine in smoke should be increased while
"tar" should remain stationary or be decreased,
thus decreasing the number of cigarettes per day
required to provide the smoker with his nicotine
requirement and lowering his daily "tar" intake .
Host previous evidence has not incriminated
nicotine as a health hazard although some authorities
considered nicotine to be harmful to the cardiovascular
system. As recently as 1964, the Surgeon General's
Report on Smoking and Health, which evaluated all
evidence to that date, gave nicotine a clean bill
of health . It is now alleged that recent evidence
demonstrates nicotine to indeed be involved in
cardiovascular problems
. Also, data collected byNCI on three sets of experimental cigarettes whose
smoke condensates were studied-in mouse skin-painting
experiments indicate in all three studies a correlation
*between specific carcinogenicity and nicotine content
P4 f . . .the enndensate_
The decision as to which of the two routes

~o 'llow with nicotine (simultaneous "tar" and
;nico~ine decrease or "tar" decrease, nicotine increase)
~ be a difficult one . Whichever route is selected,
preciable segment of the smoking-health proponent
ation in the other camp will be embittered and
bly deluge the press wit4 unfavorable comments .
To generate increased levels of nicotine in smoke
at -4duced or stationary "tar" levels requires a
source of nicotine. This has been discussed at some
• length under Tobacco Filler (Section I . A . 4 .) .
If one examines what is required of an ideal "
cigarette in terms of "tar", nicotine, and carbon
monoxide deliveries according to the low "tar"-increased
nicotine-low carbon monoxide delivery theory, it is
apparent that a real challenge and "opportunity" are
presented . In the following table, the deliveries
of several typical cigarettes are summarized together
with the corresponding ideal situation .
Ra R'Z4252
• 18
c. Pesticides
Over the oast decade, several pesticides

previously used on tobacco have been banned and
subsequently replaced with acceptable compounds .
It is anticipated that during the next decade some
of the currently acceptable pesticides will be
found to exert some health or environmental hazard
and they too will be banned . Soil impregnated with
a pesticide usually requires several years for complete
dissipation and the pesticide will appear in subsequent
years' crops but at a decreasing level . This might
be a problem with products exported to countries
such as West Germany whose•pesticide laws are very
strict . Most pesticides on tobacco are transferred
intact in some degree to the smoke stream ; the
balance appears as decomposition products in the .
smoke stream and butt .
d. Polycyclic Hydrocarbons
Concern with cigarette smoke polycyclic
ocarbons allegedly carcinogenic to man has
axed and waned for over 20 years . Some dozen
cyclic hydrocarbons, typified by benzo(alpyrene,
a inogenic to mouse skin, are present in
to~cco smoke . In addition, several carcinogenic
~ro9en analogs are aresent in•tobacco smoke .
It is anticipated that during the projection
od these polycyclic hydrocarbons will again be
~asized. With regard to mouse skin carcinogenicity,
~cco smoke is a unique mixture of .tumor inhibitors,
tumor initiators, and tumor promoters which may exert
their activity either additively or synergistically .
It is conceivable that some government or medical
agency will investigate in detail this additive
and/or synergistic effect, an experiment that has •
not been conducted to date .
Since the polycyclic hydrocarbons are "tar"
components, reduction in cigarette "tar" levels
effectively reducesthe levels of these allegedly
harmful polycyciic hydrocarbons . Selective removal
of polycyclic hydrocarbons from the "tar" by
fi l trati on is very unl i kely . However, a1 terati on
of the burning characteristics of the tobacco
rods to decrease polycyclic hydrocarbon formation
is a distinct possibility . Burning characteristicS .
can be changed by blend selection, paper porosity,
additives, air dilution, etc . Most additives
studied in this regard to date have imparted an
undesirable quality to the smoke .
RJR2425 4
19
e . Metallic Compounds
1 . Polonium-210
The concern over polonium-210 in smoke

as a causative factor in lung cancer first
surfaced in the early 60's, and effective
counterargument : and data were presented to
offset the original thesis and thd ensuing
publications . Recently this argument has
again been publicized, but to date no serious
concern appears warranted .
Because of the ease with which the public

can become concerned with things "radioactive"
the claim of the hazard of polonium-210 in smoke
will continue sporadically throughout the •
• projection period . • •
ii . Cadmium
Several dozen papers on the carcinogenicity
of cadmium and its presence in tobacco and smoke
have appeared during the past decade. The
publicity concerning the hazard to the smoker
has been relatively low level . However, this
material - as an item of concern to the industry -
might be emphasized extensively within the next
decade, probably near the end of it .
Nitrosamines
The presence of nitroeamines in tobacco and smoke
demonstrated, and claims concerning the hazard to
the smoker in terms of respiratory tract cancer were
advanced . Even the major proponents of the theory of
lung cancer causation by cigarette smoke are divided
in their estimate of the role of this class of
comAounds in respiratory tract cancer . Many nitrosamines,
including several present in tobacco smoke, are
carcinogen :c to laboratory animals, but the dosage
required to demonstrate activity is fairly high in
comparison .to other carcinogens ; e. g ., benzo(alpvrene .
Claims about the hazard from nitrosamines in smoke
will surface on and off during the pro3oction period . It
is also possible that similar claims will be levelled at
nitrosamines in chewing tobacco since at least one brand
(a European one) analyzed showed relatively high levels .
of several nitrosamines in comparison to the others . At
has been demonstrated in laboratory animals that ingcstion 0
of nitrosamines can initiate cancer not only in the digestive . a
No
tract but also at other sites .
R ~ R2,4255
20
0
2 ._ Gas-Phase CoMponents
a . Carbon Monoxide
It is claimed that carbon monoxide in the mainstream

smoke from a smoking article has a harmful effect on the
cardiovascular system of the smoker . Carbon monoxide
combines with the blood hemoglobin to form carboxyhemoglobin,
and hemoglobin thus bound cannot transport oxygen . lhis
places a higher work demand on the heart to pump more
blood to provide the same oxygen level to the system . The
sidestream smoke also contains carbon monoxide at a
substantially higher level per cigarette than the main-
stream smoke . Thus, considerable publicity has appeared
with regard to the carbon monoxide levels in environmental
smoke and its effect on nonsmokers in close proximity to
the smoker in the act of smoking . Carbon monoxide and
nicotine are the two components in environmental smoke
which have received the most adverse publicity . '
At least one country (Sweden) has legalized the

labelling of cigarette packs with the per cigarette
on monoxide delivery (to be in effect 1-1-77) ;
eral other countries (West Germany, France, Finland)
~~ considering such legislation .
~ in the U . S. A., the FTC is conducting pieliminary
Ou )1k to devise a system for determination of i'TC "tar",
. tine, and carbon monoxide on the same smoking sample .
•is predicted that the FTC system will be in operation
.the end of 1978 if not before, and attempts to require
: on monoxide labelling will follow soon thereafter .
Carbon monoxide levels in smoke cannot be controlled
inex ensivel by any known filter system which does not
ncrAase the pressure drop across the cigarette . Claims
that certain filter systems do reduce the carbon monoxide
level have been found to be inaccurate because the
pressure drop a :ross the filter system and overall
cigarette was increased to such a value that all smoke
products were reduced . This is symptomatic of high
pressure drop systems . The same effect observed with
special filter additives (which markedly increase the
pressure drop) claimed to be effective against carbon
monoxide can be obtained with cellulose acetate filters
at the same high pressure drop . • •
The most effective way known to date to reduce
carbon monoxide levels in cigarette smoke is air dilution .
As noted in II .C .1 .6 ., this also substantially reduces
both the "tar" and nicotine in smoke . 0
0
a
The recent READER'S DICEST article on carbon o
• monoxide is a portent of things to,come with regard
N
M
Q
0
Q
R J R24256
[1
0
to this compound . The public has been exposed to so

, many articles in the popular press on carbon monoxide
in automobile and truck exhausts that it probably
understands comments on this compound much better
than it does similar comnents on nicotine .
The concept of labelling for carbon monoxide is
fraught with dangers for the industry as it will
represent the first riedge (after the "tar" and nicotine
labelling regulations of several years ago) of a continuing
attack . It is predicted that once regulations on carbon
monoxide delivery are forthcoming, a systematic plan to
require labelling of other smoke components will be
proposed . The predicted sequences will be : carbon
r.anoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen
sulfide, aldehydes . At the same time this is occurring
attempts will be made to require labelling for such
product additives as sugar, licorice, cocoa, etc .'
b. Nitrogen Oxides
As indicated in the previous section, it is
predicted that nitrogen oxides will follow carbon
boxide as the target for labelling regulations .
There are five nitrogen oxides in cigarette smoke,
nitric ixide accounts for more than 98%of the
s~~al (usudlly about 300 u9 ver cioarette) . Traces
nitrogen dioxide, nitrous oxide (laughing gas),
w . trogen trioxide, and nitrogen pentoxide are also
sent . The mafor concern with the nitrogen oxides
i the properties of nitrogen dioxide, which generates
trous and nitric acids with water . Nitric oxide in
~.tr or oxygen can-generate nitrogen dioxide .
Because of the methods of determination of
nitrogen oxides (usually the nitric oxide and nitrogen
dioxide), the oxides of nitrogen have historically,
been expressed as nitrogen dioxide . This is contrary
to the state of affairs existing in the smoke since
over 90% of the nitrogen oxides is nitric oxide .
Expressing the nitrogen oxides as nitric oxide will
serve two purposes : It more closely describes the
content of smoke in terms of the actual smoke component,
and it will reduce the value reported as nitric oxide
to 30/46 or 0 .65 of the value reported as nitrogen
dioxide . Thus a 300-pg delivery of nitrogen oxides
expressed as nitrogen dioxide would be a 195-Ug
delivery expressed as nitric oxide . •
c . Hydrogen Cyanide
The toxicity of hydrogen cyanidE is well-known .
In an industrial atnosphere, the permitted Threshold
Limit Value (TLV) for hydrogen cyanide is 10 ppm .
22
The TLY is defined as that average concentration to which

a worker may be exposed for 8 hours per day, 5 days per
week for his working career . 10 ppm of hydrogen cyanide
is equivalent to approximately 11 ng/ml .
The mainstream smoke from an average cigarette
contains from 200 to 400 ug of hydrogen cyanide ; if
a 10-puff cigarette is assumed with 35 ml/puff, then the
hydrogen cyanide concentration per ml is 5,0'to 1140 ng/ml .
The sidestream smoke contains higher levels per cigarette .
Early in the projection period, claims about the

hazard of hydrogen cyanide to the smoker and in environmental
smoke will increase . A publication already is imminent
in that the READER'S DIGEST plans an article on hydrogen
cyanide in cigarette smoke sometime in the very near
future . Hydrogen cyanide, like carbon monoxide, is a
compound that the general public is mere aware of than
say, nico tine .
Hydrogen cyanide in mainstream smoke is controllable
several methods : The use of air dilution, the use of
ic filter additives, and/or the use of carbon filters .
One of the classical treatments for hydrogen
nide exposure where distress is .observed is the
alation of nitrites such as a 1 nitr,ite . It
Id be argued (as a last resort) thet the hydrogen
nide in inhaled cigarette smoke is much less
2ardous ttan the same level of hydrogen cyanide in
because cigarette smoke contains substantial
uaantities of several nitrites (methyl nitrite, ethyl
n'~trite, etc .) whose simultaneous inhalation with the
cyanide may affect in part its toxicity . It is
predicted that before 1985 attempts to require labelling
of the cigarette pack for er cigarette hydrogen cyanide .
delivery will be implement~
d. Hydrogen Sulfide
The public generally identifies hydrogen sulfide
with the odor of rotten eggs . Most do not realize
that the toxicity of hydrogen sulfide, as in its TLY,
is the same (10 ppm) as hydrogen cyanide . 10 ppm of •
hydrogen sulfide Is about 14 ng/ml . Its level in
cigarette mainstream smoke is slightly less (50 -150 vg/cigarette
than that of hydrogen cyanide . If a 10-puff cigarette is
assumed with 35 ml/puff, then the hydrogen sulfide
is 140 to 280 rg/ml . The levels in sidestream smoke are
also higher than those in mainstream smoke .
u
The level of hydrogen sulfide in mainstream smoke 00
should be controllable by air dilution, basic filter a~
additives, carbon, and/or inclusion of nontoxic metallic
compounds able to form sulfidcs'in the filter . a
A
C10
RJ R2425g
23
0
It is predicted that attempts to require package
labelling for the Mrr ci arette delivery of hydrogen
sulfide wt11 follow the successful implementation of
such labelling with regard to hydrogen cyanide .
e . Other
Before the end of the projection period, the
aldehydes, ketones, and acids in•cigrrette mainstream
smoke will again be emphasize d as health hazards to the
smoker and those in the sidestream smoke wili .be claimed
as hazards to the nonsmoker exposed to environmental
smoke .
In the mainstream smoke of a cigarette delivering

about 15 mg of "tar", the acetaldehyde and acetone
contents are about 900-1000 and 450-500 ug, respectively .
The sidestream smoke levels are at least three times
these values . ,
It is alleged that the al-dehydes, ketones, and
acids interfere with the lower respiratory tract defense
mectranisms by ciliastasis and inhibition bf macrophage
~~~ vity . There is, however, evidence to suggest that
1ts obtained in in vitro systems with detached
tissue are not ent7apo ab,1e to an in vivo system . Pas-
~"sa - of acetaldehyde in smoke through t~ ora cavity .
:~ectively "scrubs" out much bf this aldehyde frn^~ the
A ke stream ; thus very little reacges the smokeres lungs
ntcrfere with the two defense*mechanisms noted above .
?~ has been demonstrated both in laboratory animals
humans .
€ Ten or twelve years ago the concern about aldehydes,
etc., and their interference with the lung defense
mechanisms was high and led to the surge of carbon
filter cigarettes in the mark~t . Subsequent studies
blunted many of the original claims . However, it ts
predicted that near the end of the projection period
(1985-1989), this theory will again be emphasized .
. Smoke "Stran ers" Generated b Uni uel Processed Tobacco Products
stems
Filler and Filter avorant ystems, an n que aper Dye Systems
As the complexity of RJRT pro4ucts increases in terms of the use of

uniquely processed tobacco materials, unique filler and filter flavorant
systems, and unique paper dye systems, the need for detailed smoke comparison :
studies to satisfy the Legal Department requirements that no smoke "strangers
be generated will increase . It is predicted that the marketability of a
new product involving one or more of these systems will ultimately depend on
such a demonstration even when consumer acceptability, esthetics of packaging :
design, etc ., are high .
.
R~Rz~2~9
. ., ,, : . .
.i
14
0
Five years ago such studies were run sporadicallx in our laboratory,
but since then, the number of analyses has substantially increased :
Fortunately, we are in an excellent posttion to conduct such comparison

studies to search for "strangers" in smoke . During the past folir years,
we have shortened the turn-around time from about nine months to less than
a month, increased the detail of the total analysis (1400 components vs
500 components), and improved the quanti•tation . It is anticipated that
improved technology and•increased staffing will permit such comparison
to be carried out with even shorter turn-around time, in greater detail,
and with improved quantitation .
To disprove our claims that such systems as those mentioned above
introduce no "strangers",in the smoke, other laboratories (government,
competitor, medical agencies) would have to be able to perform such
E no
analyses in at least the same detail as we . At present, no other
laboratory is in such a position to do so . Hopefully, we will maintain
our lead in analytical expertise for such comparison studies : With
this technology at our disposal, we will always be able to claim that
we expended more than a cursory effort in our search for "strangers"and were indeed diligent in our investigations
.
.~ R
J
- . .~...w.~ ..
, 2s
0
POSITION PAPER - fORMAL DOCUt•tENTATION
OING AND'HEALTHi PRt1DUCT AND'St10KE CO2_,4PONENTS

PRODUCT C0I4PONENTS : A. Filler 1 . Tobacco Tlpes
1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENT IDENTIFIED DES/ CRIQED
Some investigators claim that the level of flue-cured tobacco in a smoking productt
is, through its smoke, related to respiratory tract cancer ; e. g ., in epidemiol.ogical
studies, the U . K., whose smoking products are essentially a11 ftue-cured, has a much
ig~ier incidence of respiratory tract cancer than the U . S. A., whose smoking productsi
tT flue-cured
conin , buriey and p a percen ages
Turkish ius substantil o - types tem
tf GV
material . The claim is that the flue-cured is .diiuted in the American blend by
riclusion of tobaccos or tobacco materials which generate less active "tar" . Laborato
allegedly support this premise since the specific activity of flue-cured "tar" I
greater than those of burley, stem sheet, Maryland and slightly greater than
of the Turkish . The activity of flue-cured smoke is alleged to be due to the
wax and sugar content of the tobacco . Waxes in the tobacco are alleged to be
ursors of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons ; sugars, which constitute 12 to 20x'
fte tobacco, are precursors of phenols which are alleged to promote the activity of ;;
the*%!arcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons . Flue-cured usuall y g enerates an acidic
e which is more readily inhalable than the more basic smoke from burley or a
~d containing ntiai levels sf burley .
WHAT WILL HAP
~ '"The ME eal t claims against flue-cured tobacco will escalate dramatically .
estio s ema anced that the current flue-cured types should be altered
geneti%a to 0 0 0 pe flue-cured types with reduced waxes and sugar content .
FRERM WHAT WILL BE WNW PACT/ IF1PL I CAT I ON
If these cla bbcome too vociferous and the requests for altered flue-cured
ccos become too nding, chaos in the southeastern tobacco growing area could
olt . In addition, all blends in RJR products would require re-evaluation when
pft flue-cured types or reduced levels of flue-cured tobaccos are included . ,
ft wNEN WILL IT HAPPEN , '

Toward the end of the projection period : between 1983 and 1989 .
. . SOURCES S OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSESIFORECASTS AND RATIONALF .

now
C Results of the biological study of the specific activities of the flue-cured
aiy, . Maryland, Turkish, and stem sheet material are summarized in Ftyndcr and
Noffmann', "Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967, pp . 516-518, 531-532 .
The role of smoke acidity from various tobacco types, ease of inhalation of these
smokes, relationship to respiratory tract cancer are sur,niarized in Larson and Silvett
"Tobacco : Experimental nnd Clinical Studies , " Suppl . I , Nilliams . and Wilkins, 1968 ;
pp. 612-615 . The claims that the use of flue-cured in smoking products is relaterto ;,
respira :ory tract cancer appear in articles by Passey and Elson, DifferPrct Smoking-
Rssks of Flue-cured and Air-cured Tobaccos, J . FATttGL . . 101, xviffi
assey et a ., mo ng, s s o D erent obaccos, BRIT . MED . J ., 1971 (4) 19R-zot .
, p,
RJ RZ4Z6 1
' • POSITION PAPER - FOR14/1L t)nCMF.NTATION
ING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COt1PONENT .S

i
r CT COt1PGaENTS : A. Filler . 2 . Processed Tobacco Products
1 . TREND, ISSUE OR EVENT IDEtJTIFIED/DESCRIBED

It has been alleged that inclusion of G7-type sheet in tobacco products decreases
specific carcinogenicity of smoke condensate . Uowever, increasing stem sheet content
to a very high level will eventually be criticized because stem sheet, on smoking,yields
excessive quantities of gas-phase components alleged to be detrimental to respiratory
tract defense mechanisms . Thus inclusion of additional stem materials in smoking
p?IS'du_qs may be 1 imi ted .
several expanded tobaccos jRJR (Freon 11), PN (ammonia/carbon (1ioxide), NCSU
freeze-drying)) , only the RJR product contains a non-tobacco component (Freon 11
rocessing . In the future, our use of Freon 11 and its residual level in tobacco
attacked on the basis of health . It is unlikely that such an attack will be
ful because of the demonstrated low toxicity of Freon 11 and the low residual
1~ of Freon 11 in expanded tobacco, but the attack itself may provide Omrelcome
p ~~ relations problems .
RJR's use of Freon 11 as an expansion bgent for tobacco becomes more widely
; governmental ~' Oedical agencies will question the safety of Freon 11-containing .
tobacco. Such ende :J ill not .substantially affect sales, but considerable public
re~#.o~ns work will . 1~ uired to discount and offset ensuing publicity .
Allft WIL-rjf ITL~~ I V
.CT/IMPLICATION
i
' If any ffftfut ~0vidence is presented that fluorocarbons in aerosol products pres,
bscure he .~lth~x~€:~em and the public is aware of this evidence plus the fact that
RJ .Wproducts contain F on 11, a decrease in sales mi ght occur . Ban on fluorocarbon
use~ii~ tobacco expan~ould have a serious economic impact .
4 . ti .ti ,~EN WILL IT HAPPEN
Zoward the middle of the projection period - 1982 to 1985 .
URCES OF ENVIROtudENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
he beneficial effect of inclusion of moderate levels of stem sheets :n smoking pra~
cribed in Wynder and Hoffma m,"Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967,
2 ; in N I Re rt No . 1 . Tr*tard ess Ha ardous Ci aret s . The First Series o7
~imental i ar s (1976) . Increase in levels of gas-phase components in smo e fr
pr° s containing increased levels of stem materials is described in in-house reports ;;`
e.c ., e .kman (1974) . Impairment of respiratory tract defense mechanisms by gas-phase :
components is described in Larson and Silvette, "Tobacco : Experimental-and Clinical Stud:i
, Suppl . 111, Williams and Wilkins, 1975, 150-152,170- 173 .
The alleged effect of e!ccessive exposure to Freon 11 on the cardiovascular system f
described by Taylor and Harris, J . AM . MED . ASSOC ., 214, 81-85 (1970) but discounted by :'
Azar et a1 ., ibid, 215, 1501-1502 (1971) . t1ouse skin-painting experiments and chemistr,
of Freon 1'i=expande3 Lobacco smoke are described in NCI Re ort No . 2 . Toward Less Hazardcus
Ci ag rettes . The Second series of Ex erimental Cioarettes, n press , oagman, - x_pande
_acco an Freon V eb . .
, RJ R24262
LI
POSITIO9 PAPER - FORMAI . OQCUNCNTATION
NGAN p,~ HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COt1PONENT S
PRODUCT C^MP014Et1TS : A . Fi l 1 er . 3 . Tobacco Substi tute s
1 . TREN-9, ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDENTIF1E0 DE S( CRIQED

Several tobacco substitutes are now available in the market . The two most importan t
for which considerable data are available are Cytrel (Celanese) and NSM (Ii,I) .
NSti sho:.s excellent smoke chemistry and in the NCI study and .biological studies
privat~ly contracted by ICI its smoke shows lower specific activity in mouse skin-paintin
thn to~acco smoke. Much of this lowered specific activity disappears at about an
80'k~ 5acco :IiSN nix .
ytrel smoke chemistry is satisfactory although our early studies indicated som e
ers" in its smoke . Biological data in skin-painting studies with Cytrel "tar "
ar~, eq'vivocal : contracted studies indicate lower specific activity than tobacco smol :e ;
ies indicate about the same activity as tobacco smoke . Studies to resolve thi s
are in rrogress .
2.b~.~ N'ILL HAPPE N
~ . .
~ RJR competitor in the U . S. A. will market a cigarette containing a tobacco
s ., ; ::~ ute admixed with t bacco . No health benefits will be claimed but will be
imi'ed .
MZ e use . to su6stitute by a competitor will prompt RJR to market a cigarettE

ing i .opri ary. substitute J10, a puffed grain . This will nave substantia l
c adO ge f :#f~ since' the J10 is much less expensive than tobacco, Cytre l
a9m~
1
is a puffed t and will replace three times its weight of tobacco, ha s
12" nt smoke composi n properties, smoking quality, and preliminary data indicate
nt biologicalq~~erties allegedly related to health .
4 . .~.~, N WILL IT HAPPEN
. fore 1982 .
,, . RCES OF ENVIRON1101TAL ANALYSES/ FORECASTS AND RATIONAL E
emical and biological data on the smoke from NSM and rytrzl tobacco substitute s
ei~ alone or admixed with tobacco appear in NCI Report No . 2 . Toward Less Hazardous
Ci ~ttes . The Second Set of Experimental CiQarettes n press), NC Report No . 3.
arettes . The Third Set of Experimental Cigarettes . ug . 976
n ormat on s ava a e n CONFIDENTIAL memoran a from Celanes e
and-ICI: Detailed J10 smoke studies are described in in-house reports by Lloyd et al .
(1974), Green et al . (1974 , 1976) . Our work showing "strangers" in Cytrel smokeis
described by ScTiu-ma-c-her et al . (1969) .
0
0
Zo
~ RJ R24263 ~o
r
P
W
28
0
POSITl01J PAPER - FORMAL WCUME1lTA'f ION
SMOKING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE Ca•1PONENTS
C1 CO!1PONENTS : A . Filler . 4 . Nicotine
1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDENTIFIED/DESCRIBED
The Mierican tobacco industry will find itself on the horns of a dilemna . It will
be pressured by two separate groups of proponents of the smoking-health theory . One
group claims that the nicotine content of the filler should be reduced so that the
nicotine transferred to smoke is at a reduced level . This group claims that nicotine
is~, .in olved not only in cardiovascular problems but is also a factor in respiratory
tract ancer . The other group claims that the nicotine content of the filler should
b eased so that the nicotine transferred to smoke is at an increased level for
t~e sams "tar" delivery . They will assert that, since people will continue to sroke
r" is the harsiful smoke ingredient, the smoker's physiological requirement
nicotine should be satisfied at the lowest "tar" delivery .
use of filter and/or air dilution systems with existing tobacco blends it is
le to fabricate low "tar"/la,r nicotine delivery cigarettes Hithout inte-tionally
Me content of the filler ; however, low "tar"/medium nicotine delivery cigarettes
wa "tar"/high nicotine delivery cigarettes will probably require addition of
e to the blend or use of specific high-nicotine tobaccos which yield low "tar" .
~, Solution of th .~.~tine problems as described above will result in further

pr~~~ation of th~br d mix in thp .market . Low and medium "tar" delivery cigarettes
wi ori an~dium}nico ine delivery, respectively, will continue to proliferate during :
rst p . .of t"' . jection period . Low and medium "tar" delivery cigarettes
inediu~ . hig tine delivery, raspectivEly, will appear and proliferate
the . le p the projection period if RJR or a competitor solves the
m of reducing 'tar" :nicotine ratio to 6 or 7 . .
. Q*4T WILL BE IT : PACTjMPIICATION
I&
urther proliferation of brands in the market place with low"tar"/lor+ nicotinc
cigai*ttes and low "tar"medium nicotine cigarettes commanding an ever-increasing share
ofXMA total market .
. EN WILL IT HAPPEN_
ressure by the smokinq-health proponents of the lower "tar"/loarer nicotine

t'po will continue frcxa the present through 1985 . The proponents of the other
th~~y (low "tar"/medium nicotine cigarettes) will become more vocal after 1980 .
RCES OF ENVIRO(it1ENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
A typical proponent of the low "tar"/low nicotine concept is Hammond (paper
presented at meeting on "The Origins of Human Cancer," Cold Springs Harbor,
September 1976) ; typical proponents of the low "tar"/medium nicotine or medium "tar"/hi
nicotine concept are Russell , BRIT . MED . J . 1976 (1), 1430-1433 (see also references
therein ; and Goldfarb et al . , CLIO PHARt•IACOE.-MIER ., 19, 767-772 (1976) ; PSYCHOPHAk!laC4ii':`
17, 89-93 (1970) . 0
0
• a
M
D
R JR24264
I POSITION rAPER - FAtLW1L DOCUMEtITATI0t1
SMOKING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COMPONENTS
P•
. .. . T~„r_
CO<iPO~IENTS
. : A . Filler . 5. Casing Materials . a .__.SuQar
1 . TRENDL ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDFNTIFICD/DESCRIBED
For several years, sugar either occurring naturally in flue-cured tobacco or used to
case tobacco has been indicted as a contributor to the alleged hazardous nature of ci3are ;
smoke . It is claimed that increasing the levels of sugar in the tobacco rod increases
the levels of certain polycyclic hydrocarbons (alleged tumor initiators) and phenols
(~le ed tumor promoters) in smoke, decroasss the smoke pH thus increasing its inhalabili
a~fid ireases the levels in smoke of several gas-phase comQonents alle9ed to be detri-
to the respiratory tract defense mechrnisms .
Insofar as the specific carcinogenicity of smoke from sugar-treated tobacco
enstes is concerned, the recent tICI study on various types of cigarettes containing
t ividual or combinations of casing ma terials showed no significant effect from sugar
a :• lone. However, it is alleged that sugar plus glycerol added to,the tobacco did
i ~se the specific-activity of the "tar" from such cigarettes .
2OWMT WILL HAPPEN
oponents of the smoking-health theory will further press their claims that the
a~,~;'n of sugar t end either as it occurs naturally in the flue-cured component
or as casing mateM Aesults in a product r :hose smoke is hazardous to the smoker .
Injotry rembers wi <- •empt to reduce sugar casing levels in their products while
-i~ing smoking ~ua ty and consumer acceptability .
1, WT NIL < IT CT It•iPLICATION
he i1preY of ssue will eventually involve the reduction or complete removal
ed sugar •from ; ny product formulations . This will require some manipulation o
Com y blends to ma+ n uniformity of smoking quality before and after sugar removal
or• uction . Fort e .y, we do have in-house data which show that the sugar casing
leye may be reduced su•ttantially without serious impairment of smoking quality .
4. W~~SEU VILL IT HAPPEN ,
laims against sugar are already being made, but additional pressure on the
n dry will be exerted between 1980 and 1982 .
CMURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL AttALYSES/FORECASTS AriD RATIONALE •
Wealth claims against sugar in ttibacco products are described by Elson et al .

L . CANCER INST ., 48, 1885-1890 (1972), INTL . J . CANCER, 9, 666-675 (1Q72)
ditional references therein) . Chemistry of snoke from. tobacco cased with sugar
at vari'ous levels is rcported by Wynder and Hoffmann, "Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke,"
Academic Press, 1967, 484-486 . In-house study of the effect of sugar on smoke
chemistry and quaTffy Is described by Best (1969) . Skin-paintiny studies with "tar"
from sugar-cased cigarettes are described in flCI Report No . 3 . Toa,rard Less Hazardous
Cic~arettes . The Third Set of Ex,perir.+ental CicLarettes ra , ugust .
a J R24265
'
3l1
POSITION PAPER - FORUAL pOCUt•1ENT11T10H
! NG AND itEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COt4POtlCNTS
PRODUCT COt1P0yENTS : A . Filler . 5 . Casing Materials . b . Licorice

1 . TREND, iSSUE OR EVENTS IDENTIFIED/DESCRIBED
During the projection period, health claims will be levelled at licorice used as a
casing material in snaking products . ,
To date, no serious allegations concerning the hazard of liccricb as a casing rrateri :
i ot acco products have appeared . However, several years ago the question was raised :
1N1ic~rice, because of the polycyclic structure of its•active co~,aonent, a contributor
egedly) haraiful carcinogenic polycyclfc hydrocarbons, prona ting compounds such as
p nol, and irritating gas-phase components in smoke?
one study it was alleged that pipe tobacco containing high levels of licorice
a sr,~bked in cigarette form yielded substantially higher levels of benzo(a)oyrene
i s»*ke than did licorice-free cigarette tobacco smoked under ideotical conditions .
t were obtained on the lavels in t!:e snoke froM the licorice-cased tobacco of
eno~s, aldehydes, or acids allegedly involved with health, but it was suggested that
f~"~"work should include such analyses .
_, T NILL HAPPEN
roponents of tKVI'Making-heal+h theory will allege that licorice used as a casing
Pat•e,rial in the smol~ roducts is the precursor of several toxic components in smoke
an~~V demand rema,ya ;f licorice from smoking products .
~~, ~ t
: AT IT~4WCTLItiPLICATION
~
;, . .Qemanlsmo - ealth proponents for removal of licorice from casing formulation
ecessitate C .compliance, discovery of an alternative to licorice, or
tion of data to count the allegations . Compliance with these demands to delete :
uce licorice, or use of an alternative will require detailed evaluation of
Company blend formulat s .
4.P#IEN WILL IT HAPPEN .
tween 't982 and 1985 .

5 . OURCES OF ENVIROrJNENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Comments on possible health-related problems from the use of licorice as a casing
a~~ial and suggestions for future research appear in Wynder and Hoffmann . Tobacco
bacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967, 484-486 .
,
. RJR24266
0 POSITION PAPER - FORMAL V)CUt•tENTATION
ANG
~ AtID HEALTH: P:".ODUCT AND SttOY.E CONPQNENTS
PRODUCT CC'1POyENTS : A. Filler . 5 . Casing Materials . c. Cocoa
1 . TREND,_ ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDENTIFIEC/DESCRIBED
In a recently connleted NCI study on various types of cigarettes, several additives

and/or casing materials were investigated . Among these was cocoa, The results from
this mouse skin-painting study were alieged to indicate that the inclusion of 1% cocoa
in~the~tobacco blend increased the specific carcinogenicity of the "tar" from such
ci'are ~tes over that observed for the "tar" from the control, non-cocoa treated
i : tes . It is anticipated that proponents of the smoking-health theory will eventual
ETIY__ _& these and similar data to demand the rer,oval of cocoa from or substantial
n of cocoa in smoking products . ,
2 T wILL HAPPEN , •
;oponents of the smoking-health theory will al lege that cocoa used as a casing
in smoking products is the precursor of several . toxic components in smoke as
ed by biological and chemical data and will demand removal of cocoa from smoking
3.-, UHAT !lILL BE ITS ;.iMPACT/1t•SPLICATI4N •

nds by .srrok.ft g-h altl : proponents for removal of cocoa from the casing formulatio
ecessit-M Comompliance,•discovery of an alternative, or generation of data
:tttount thOalleg V ns . Compliance with demands to delete cocoa or the use of an
alternativot-Mreq*iXWM4etailed evaluation of Company blend formulations .
H 11111 IT NA
4atween 1980 an lro .

. . RCES OF ENVIRONJiENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
e results from mouse skin-painting studies which allegedly show increased
'>aic carcinoc+enicity of "tar" from cigarettes containing 1% added coco3 are
sixo'nized in the NCI Re ort No . 3 . Toward Le_s Hazardous Ci arettes . The Third
SWK Exnerimenta parettes ra t, ugust .
RJ R24267
sl
.
4
POSITIOy PAPER - FORI4AL (1nCUUNTATION
'N i*ING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT At1D St4OKE CEN•1P4NENTS
UCTS Ca1P Ot1EtlTS : A . Filler. 5 . Casing Materials . d~

. Glycerol and Other Humectants
1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDENTIFIED/DESCP.IBED
Past allegations against the use of glycerol as a humectant have involved the
possibility that it generated acrolein, an alleged ciliastat and irritant, during
the smokin; process . The recently completed NCI study on various,types of cigarettes
containing added glycerol or added glycerol plus sugar gave resultf alleged to indicate
~at addition of sugar plus glycerol to a tobacco blend increased the activity of the
tar "i nouse
. s ki n-pa i n ti ng exper i nen t s Additi on o f glycero l a l one h o<ever gave
.,Vs~ialythesamrultashecontrl .
Humectants other than glycerol but not generally used by RJRT have also been
troi~ed for their contribution to allegedly carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons in
bacco smoke and generation of ciliastats on pyrolysis . Diethylene glycol has been
sed as a possible bladder carcinogen, but the data were obtained•from laboratory
s fed this compound and not from animals exposed in tobacco snoke•inhalation •
roponents of king-health theory will allege that glycerol and other polyols
used"as humectants king products are precursors of several toxic conponents in
srpoke or are hazar4mw'An smoke in themselves on inhalation and will demand the removal ;;
ooffi'bo humectants ~r A smoking products . -
T !' E I1~ACT 1NPLJCATI(1N Deman s, s health proponents for removal of glycerol and other humectants >`
moking produ"11 necessitate Company compliance, discovery of alternatives < ;:;
n ub3ect to criti , or generation of data to discount the allegations . Complianc~:,
w these demands ~~ d~lete glycerol or use of an alternative will require evaluation
o~ Qmpany blend formu tions . Glycerol is also used to facilitate tobacco cutting ;'
s~3~is aspect of the manufacturing process will have to be examined in light of no
g~yorol or use of an acceptable alternative .
EN WILL IT HAPPEN •.
IAW& Between 1982 and 1985 .
jj_SOURCES OF Ei1VIROtn•1EtITAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Discussion of humectants and their health-related problems appears in . tlynder and
F{,'inn, "Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967, 480-484 . 'The results of
mouse skin-painting studies involving "tar" from glycerTor'glycerol/sugar-,treated
tobaccos appear in NCI Re ort No . 3 . Toward Less Hazardous Cioarettes .'__Th_e Third
Set of Exverir,ental darettes ., ra t,, ugust
0
0
0
~
~
R R`Z 2,6
, 4 16
ss
,
, POSITION PAPER - FORr1AL DOCIn•1ENIATION
~ Nr A ALTH : PRODUCT AND St•sOKE COMPONENTS
PRODUCT C0t1PANENTS : A. Filler . 6 . Flavorants

1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDENTIFIED/DESCRIBED
Flavorants used on the tobacco filler not only may be transferred directly to the
mainstream smoke but also may yield decomposition products in the mainstream smoke
during the smoking orocess . Allegations concerning the hazard of'intact flavorants trans
f rreQ fre :~ the tobacco rod to the n~ainstream will also apply to filter-tip flavorants `:
t~ansf3erred intact to the smoke stream . Filter-tin flavorants . because of their senaratf
© ~€ he combustion zone, generally do not yield decomposition products . As early as
1967 it was suggested by proponents of the smoking-health theory that inclusion of
nts in smoking products is a deliberate introduction into tobacco of precursors
tants or toxic substances in t eFsmo e . It was also noted .that the sr.~oke from
ttes containing flavor additives very rarely have been assayed biologically .
.~restion was also raised whether such additives should be subject to regulation
g verroAenta l h ea l th auth or iti es . I1 ore recen tl y a lea d ing proponent (Hary.~on d ) o f
kin3-health issue stated that " . . .both (flavor) additives and the smoke
conde ate should be tested for carcinogenicity before putting such cigarettes on
rket." NCI in its continuing examination of "less hazardous cigarettes" has
sc*..ed an intensiV,.L&vestigation of flavorants used currently .
2 .~,_Wr1AT VILL HAPPELft
~ropon of khe s king-health theory will allege that sorle flavorants used on
bacco ~ ..ler ftwr filter are contributors of toxic components to the smoke and
dema~ ~her they not be added or that all flavorants used be evaluated for
effec co ; ion and ~+iological properties of smoke : They may also attempt
e the use of lavora :ts in tobacco products regulated by a governmental
he h agency .
3 T''ILL BE ITS IAVACT IMPLICATION
he Company's use of proprietary flavorants will be seriously disr-ipted is such
depWs .succeed . Appreciable effort will be required to demonstrate the safety of a
T number of specific compounds . Those not cleared will be removed from flavor
f lations, and this will necessitate substantial evaluation of our smoking products
w regard to quality . Economic advantages of the use of our proprietary Turkish-type
f ants on low-cost tobaccos may be lost or delayed because purchase of expensive
T~- i.sh tobacco will continue at the same or an increased level until at least one of o
TdMsh-type flavora~~ts (the tetraester) is cleared . _
N WILL IT HAPPEN
Soon after 1980 .
5 . SOURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIOyALE

The concern by some proponents of the smoking-health theory about adCed tobacco
flavorants is suRrnarized in Wynder end Hoffmann, "Tobacco and Tobacco Siroke," Academic
Press, 1967, 486-488 . Comr,~ents by Hammond et al . appear in the text of a paper presented cn
~
the meeting on "The Origins of Human Cancer'7n Cold Springs Harbor, .Sept . 1976 . The ~
~
eposal to conduct research on the effect of flavorants added to tobacco on the biological m
properties of smoke was presented at a September 1975 meeting of the NCI Tobacco Working Ln
Group . H
00
m
, . .. ~;. .. .,
RJR24269 • •
,.. ;, . .. ~. . . . ..,, .,~ 7
o4
I
. i
0 P0SIT10N PAPER - FORttAL DOCUMENTATION
~ AND HEALTH : PRODUCT NZD S OKE COt•1PONEtrTS

~ING
PRODUCT COMPONENTS : B . Fi 1 ter . 1 . Fi', ter t9aterials
1 . TREND, ISSUE __OR EVENTS 1DENTIFIED/DESCRIBED
The anticipated emphasis on gas-phase components such as aldehydes alleged to he

harmful to health will result in a resurgence of the interest in carbon filters . The
interest in gas-phase components by proponents of the smoking-health issue declined
peve al years ago, particularly when it was demonstrated that such components were
Leffe~tively "scrubbed" out of the smoke stream by passage over the mucous films
ng the oral cavity and therefore did r+ot reach the lower respiratory tract where
gt Has alleged they interfered with the respiratory tract defense mechanisms .
. MT WILL HAPPEN '
Proponents of the smoking-health theory will claim that increaseduse of stem

ia1s, while lowering the alleged carcinogenicity of the "tar", is increasing the
of gas-phase components that allegedly impair respiratory tract defense
nisms . In response to this, industry members will market a carbon-filter
tte whose smoking quality does not suffer from carbon-filter off-taste .
. NHAT WILL BE
~ Y YTr'YNPACT/INPLICATIOlI .
jhe impact w rl the development of a superior carbon-filter cigarette . This
on fi~":r~ wil be esigned to minimize the carbon-filter off-taste so prevalent
eariip~rbon- •er cigarettes . Another alternative will involve modification
the s4-ijj;;j~eetjWW. ial to minimize generation of the allegedly harmful gas-phase
onents .
WHEN WILL IT H
~$*6efore 1985 .
., SOURCES OF ENVIROMENTAL AtiALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Charcoal filters and their effect on the gas-phase composition are discussed in
er and Hoffmann, "Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967,'S34-543 .
crubbing" action of oral cavity secretions on gas-phase components in humans
h*.been described by Dalhamn, EINVIROU . HLTH ., 16, 831- 835 (1968) . Increase in the
yp1s of various gas-phase smoke components with ' increasing stem content is
cribed by Heckman (1974) .
R J R24270 !
JJ
0
POSITION PAPER - F0M1AL DOCUMtCtITATION
'"WKIN6 AND kEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE Ca,1PONENYS
PRODUCT C0MOPIENTS : C . Paper . 1 . Paper Additives :byes
1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENTS 1DEHTIFIED/DESCRIBED
While very little has been written by proponents of the smoking-health theory on
the use of dyes in smoking products, it is anticipated that RJRT's success with the
WINCHESTER and MORE products will eventually direct the attention of the smoking-health :
;Pproppnents to the dyed tirn?pers . Allegations will be advanced that the dye systeris
'tneect chemical and biological evaluation, tlew dyed systems introduced in the future by
or other industry members will also fall into this category .
FJHAT WILL HAPPEN
g ? Proponents of the smoking-health theory will either allege that dye systems such
hose employed in WINCHESTER and t10RE are hazardous or will demand demonstration
eir safety . .
. d WHAT HILL BE ITS If4PACT/IMPLICATIOy
Other than a~ftio- ble flurry of adverse publicity which might temporarily hurt
sales of the F10RE •re in an excellent position to rebut any claims against the
#~c~>d~Hrapper of e •the b :ORE or WINCHESTER . Detailed smoke comparison studies
voWing over 150 colmoonents in the smoke from the MORE blend wrapped in regular
qr vs isK"10REel wrapped in dyed paper indicate no "strangers" in the sr.ake of
£ ciga~tires ma ~d in the U . S. A . or U . K. Similar evidence is available for
e WINCFIE-STA.R.
1JHEN WILL IT
Prior to 1980:
SOURCES OF ENVIRONIIENTAL ANALYSESIFORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Comrnents on the use of dyes in smoking products appear in liynder and Hoffmann,
acco and Tobacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967, 486, in which a study by Kroller
Ptited . Experimental work conducted in-house on the absence of "strangers- trom rwr .i
4%"ke is described by Green (1973 1974), Best et al . (1976) and their .absence from
W-WCHESTER smoke by Green et al . 11971) .
. a
0
0
~~
©
, . O%
N
..
sa
POSITION PAPER - FOnUIL DOCUFIENTATION
~ING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT AND STIOKE C014PONENTS
SMOKE COMP0NENTS : B . EnyiPonmental Smoke

1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENT IDENTIFIED/DESCRIBED
Proponents of the smoking-health theory will allege that exposure of the nonsmoker~" :.
involuntarily is subjecting him to an unwarranted health hazard . Yhey will claim that
jis~is particularly harmful when the nonsmoker is alreedy suffering soaheeilment such
s a• allergy, cardiovascular problem, respiratory problem . The arguments will be
ed that the environmental smoke contains the same allegedly noxious components to :
ch the smoker is exposed ; i .e ., carbon monoxide, nicotine, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen ;~
s, hydrogen cyanide, and the like .
These proponents will apply the same health-related arguments about the hazards
vironnental smoke components to the nonsmoker involuntarily exposed as they
V *been for the hazards of mainstream smoke inhaled by the smoker .
. W WILL
T HAPPEN •
- -
By constlsnt repetition of their claims on the alleged hazard of involuntary
sure to envirohina-tal smoi:e and its components, the proponents of the smoking-heaiti
theory will convi cesmore and more nonsmokers that they are being imposed upon and the "
~omokers in tur '•~h the help of various health agencies, t•itll push for additional
)itions to barrsmoking in more and more public places, business areas, work areas,
T LR1-tAME_IS"- PACTII_N,PLICATIOt~
Q&akma AM 1.40
If more ind r:rokers are restricted in their smoking regime by such regulatiori'
their daily ons .ption of cigarettes and other smoking products will decrease .
t he regulation ~ . n on smoking eventually extends to the workplace in any business :
~ern, the sncl:e , w01l have a great portion of his possible snoking time deleted froq' : .
e~ork day . This usually accounts for half a person ' s active day . This situation `
Meventually result in a decline in cigarette consumption, fewer new smokers, and
ation of smoking by many light smokers (less than 10 cigarettes/day) . .
F~"WHEN 19ILL IT HAPPEN

The condemnation of environmental smoke will continue but at an increased level
ftthe present until the proponents of this theory have obtained regulations
llannin9 smokin9 in almost all comrnunity_areas such as restaurants, work places, publi
rldings, etc . Eventually one nonsmoker in a given work area will be able to control
,0._*san,wking habi ts of the rest .
5 . SOURCES OF ENYIROh!tENTAL A .Nf:LYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIVIlALE
A host of references on this subJect have appeared over the past few years with
special emphasis on exposure of the nonsmoker to nicotine and the amount inhaled
involuntarily and appearing in the bloodstream ; e .g ., Russell et al . . LANCET 1975 (1) ;1;
179-181 ; Hinds et al .,, NEW ENG . J . t~~ED ., 292, 844-845 (1975) . ~nvo untary exposure to~ ~
ot~ier smoke com`porents has also beun the subfect of numerous articles ; e . g ., "Tobacco : 0
0
Experimental and Clinical Studies," Supp1 . III, Williams and Wilkins Co ., 1975, 288-291 . a
0
..
a
y
RJ RZq,272 N
LA
. POSITIO« PAPER - FOR1M
c..~OKING AND ttEALTH : PRODUCT AND SF10t ;E • C0.IPONENTS
~ICE CO'tP0l;EpTS : C : 1 . Particulate-Phase Comaonents :' a . FTC "Tar"
1 . TREND, ISSUE, OR EVENT IDEtlTIFIED/DESCRIBEO

Because of the allegations that the "tar" contains many co~~ponents harmful to the
smoker, many consumers have shifted their smoking habits from high_,,tar" to mediun-"tar
cigarettes or from nediun-"tar" to lori="tar" cigarettes ; i . e ., a•gradual downshift to
e next lower "tar" category . This trend has continued for over a decade ; the 30- to
S-mg~delivery cigarette is almost nonexistent ; 25-mg delivery cigarettes are at the
~~ the "tar" scale . .
'~Constant repetition of the allegations about the harmful properties of "tar" will
nce more and more smokers•to shift dotirn to lower "tar" levels ; the manufacturers
~11#-espond with products geared to match this trend and capture the market .
.
1T WILL HAPPEPI •
ventually the "tar" delivery will be lowered until the top "tar" delivery is 20 ng`= : :"'
~e 5 mg, then 10 mg, and so on . The pro onents of the smoking-health theory tiill still
nue their efforts to have the "tar" values lowered even more . It is obvious where
-trend will end 'ventual weaning of the smoker .
~WF4'1T WILL BE 14, $ACT/IHPLICATIOtI
Topr :, ea article with both flavor and nicotine satisfaction at lower
~ ower ~ta~" 1ev 11 require considerable expenditure of time, money, and effort'
an efi~o~~o di appropriate blends, filter and air dilution systems, flavor
ms, etc . 1hu cost of producing a satisfactory smoking article will rise
'inually as the ar yield decreases ; i . e ., the profit margin for such products
decrease . To ~ain the prosit margin, price increases will be necessary .
~ This fact, coup~drwith the gradual weaning of the smoker, will'result in a decline :,
( ~~ette consumption , fewer new smokers, and cessation of smoking by light smokers (less :
10 cigarettes/day) .
NNEN WILL IT HAPPEN
The scare tactics presently used by the smoking-health proponents to persuade the
r to smoke lower "tar"-delivery cigarettes will continue to be used well into the
07ection period . By 1985, cigarettes delivering 12 mg "tar" or less will represent
j3sabst half the mar :.et .
6J§QURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Recently Hammond et al . (paper presented at Cold Springs Harbon in September 1916) ..
extolled the benefits o' sm",ko ing 1ow-"tar" cigarettes . Additional reports of this type :;;
will continue to appear in the future . NCI . as a result of its work on .the fabricatio6:
of less hazardous cigarettes, has also commended the lon-"tar"'cigarettes to the publi .4
in various TV appearances by NCI personnel (Gori, Rauscher) .
.~
0
0
~
r
O
N
R~R2~2~3 W
, • 30
POSITION PAPER • FORMAL DOCUf'IENTATION

0
SMOKING AND IIEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COMPONENTS
, . . .
SE CO~!PONEtITS : C . 1 . Particulate-Phase CU onents, b. Nicotine
1 . TRE!ID, ISSUE,_OR EVENT IDENTIFiEDIDESCRIBED
Cl.inical and biological studies on nicotine in smoke will result in one or other of
the fulloaring : nicotine will be glven a clean bill of health or nicotine will be
considered a hazard .
Some smoking-health proponents already allege that nicotine is involved in cardio-
v~s cu ar problems and is as hazardous as the "tar" ; other smoking-health proponents
a'Ileg that nicotine is essentially harmless and the hazard to the smoker resides in
t~t ar", not the nicotine . st
7he first group clairr.s both the " tar" and nicotine should be lowered ; the second
~ suggesting that people smoke for the nicotine satisfaction, claim that the "tar"
be lowered but the nicotine increased so that the smoker will smoke fewer ci5arett
e same daily nicotine intake, and thus be exposed to less "tar" .,
ecent evidence fron the NCI studies on various sets of experimental cigarettes is
Rd to de:onstrate that nicotine level of the "tar" correlates with*tumor yield in
rkoft~kin-painting experiments . .•
T WILL HAPPEN
i+o groups of ke EFC bents of the smoking-health theory will remain at cdds on the
alleqed harnful eff~- .,1 nicotine In smoke . Each group will attempt to persuade the
ew.
putr~ to its point~l
4 •
. AT t/iLVVE IMLi1PCT/ItdPLICATIa'1 - .
he y wi • e to decide whether to pursue products with lowered "tar",
d nt~cr` fie, o• ____ _ ducts with lowered "tar", increased nicotine, or both . . Nhicheve;
s selectc+d onP p of smoking-health proponents will be critical of the choice . :
owering both "t and nicotine delivery is possible with existing technology
, paper porosI a eir dilution and filtration, etc .) but lowering the "tar" while
r1c asing the nicotin"elivery will be a challenge . .
4 .umWEN !iILL IT HAPPEN

fSone time during the profection period, evidence allegedly demonstrating that
~ine is harr.~ful to the smoker wi11 be presented .
5 OURCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL At :ALYSES/FORECASTS {4"ID RATIONALE
~ Hammond et al„ proponents of the loN-"tar", low-nicotine theory, outlined their
tWaaty in a paper presented at a neeting on "The Origins of Human Cancer" .
nted at Cold Spring Harbor, September 1976 . Russell, a proponent of the
r", high-nicotine theory, outlined his ~èasoning in an article in the BRIT .
. J,M~D ., 1976 (1), 1430-1433 . Involvement of nicotine in "tar" carcinogenesis is
discussed-WNCI Reports 1 2and 3 . Tcxrard Less Hazardous Cinarettes, and also
by Bock (paper presente at ee ng, _,
RJ RZ4274
39
,
POSITION PAPER - FORMI)AL DÒCUMENTATION

w
~NIO ING AND HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE COIIPONENTS

J.CO'1P0NENTS : C . 2 . Gas-Phase Con2onents- a . Carbon Monoxide
TREND, ISSUE OR EVENT IDEflTIFIED/DESCRIQED
It is alleged that carbon Fanoxide in tobacco smoke is hazardous to the smoker as

are "tar" and nicotine . The sr,r,* critics of the smoking habit and its alleged hazard
to the smoker who succeeded in having the "tar" and nicotine levels in smoke reported
by a government agency (the FTC) are now pursuing similar efforts'for carbon monoxide .
Thk-FTq, in fact, is working on the analytical procedure for simultaneous determination
ta, nicotine, and carbon monoxide .
e country (Sweden) has already implemented legislation to report carbon monbxide
iver.ies ; several other European countries'are now in the process of implementing
'4gislation . •
T WILL HAPPEN
;'gislation to require the reporting of carbon monoxide delivery of each A+*rican
11 be vnacted . The FTC will probably handle the analysis for carbon monoxide
as_it Dbes the "tar" and nicotine analyses . •
is flow of events will eventually lead to a carbon monoxide "derby" similar
W""tar" derby .
3. ~.'!HAT M1LL RE ITS"

.~ ~*~A,T/IFIPLICATIOt1
r'a
.~ carbo ~.~noxi e"d~rby" will require research to discover more efficient ways to
the ~ . :gn mori~Tlx~e de1 ivery of a cigarette . At present the most effective
~~~is ~luti t air dilution also reduces "tar" . In view of the publicity
ted 5y recent .. les on carbon monoxide in smoke, the company that can discover
a~o reduce carb . oxide without reducing "tar" at the same time will have a
dec .ed advante9e .
verse public M~~~ta~ons concerning carbon monoxide in smoke will be a problem ;
rhon monoxide del"Tvery cigarettes will lose market'share .
4 . OMEN WILL IT HAPPEN
PRO
porting of carbon monoxide delivery of each brand will be required by 1980 .
URCES OF ENVIRU'C!ENTAL AlIALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE
Of the hundreds of articles In the scientific literature on carbon monoxide in
_ i i'`tte sr :oke and its alleged hazard, the one with the greatest impact on the
puVM is the recent READER'S DIGEST article (October 1976) .
R J R24275
„
©
%•
40
ft
POSITION PAPER - FORM/lL t)nCUt4EIiTATION

. I.
Sin, ING AND HEALTII : PRODUCT AND SMOKE C0t4PONENTS
PRODUCT COt1PONEtITS : C . 2. Gas-Phase Components . b . Nitrogen Oxides
1 . TREND . ISSUE, OR EVENTS IDEkTIFIED/DESCRIBED
It Is alleged that nitrogen oxides in tobacco smoke are hazardous to the smoker .
Cigarettes deliver beNeen 200 and 400 ug of nitrogen oxides per cigarette, and of these
n ro~,en oxid:s, over 98% is nitric oxide . Reporting of "tar" and nicotine deliveries
b the~FTC is an established fact ; requirements to report carbon monoxide delivery will
p~ y be next, followed by requirements tc report nitrogen oxides delivery .
,4gislation to require the reporting of nitrogen oxides delivery o.f each American
ill be enacted . The FTC will probably handle the analyses for nitrogen oxides
e.
3. ~t~' WILL BE ITS It1PACT/IMPLICATION
Nnitrogen oxid "c rby" will result . '
Articies in th •~ic press will inform the smoker of the nitrogen oxides
eeq~nt of tobacco ~4and its alleged hazard . At the present time most smokers
3r ~ too•knowlE .: .ab1 q' about nitro en oxides .
kklic•~tio s pro`bleras will arise . '
E!1 ! : .LL: ~ HAP
tNeen 1983 a V85 .
5 . ~#URCES OF ENVI .O ~~~'i,TAL ANALYSES/FORECASTS AND RATIONALE

'%wt.n the READER'S DIGEST article (October 1976) on carbon monoxide, it was noted
thW* foilow-up article will discuss nitrogen oxides in tobacco smoke much in the
sa~anrer as carbon r.wnoxide was discussed in the October article . Presumably the
d hazards of exn^sure to nitrogen oxides will be outl•ined in great•detail . The
ef ~ of nitric oxide on the cardiovascular system is discussed by Larson and Silvette
"T :, co : Experimental and Clinical Studies," Suppl . III, Williams and ::ilkins Co .,
1~100-101 .
04
0
CD
n
R S R2a''(6
POSITION PAPER - FORMAL DOCUh1ENT/1TI0N
SG AfiD I(EALTH : PR(1DUCT AND SMOKE C014PO1JENTS
PRO l1CT COMPONENTS : C.2 . Gas-Phase Components . c . Hydrooen Cyanide

1 . TREND, ISSUE . OR EVENTS IDEfiTIFIED,fDESCRIBED
Hydrogen cyanide in tobacco smoke is alleged to be hazardous to the sonoker . The
public is probably mre knovrledqeable about the toxicity of hydrogen cyanide than it
is about many other smoke components . Cigarettes deliver between 200 and 400 u9
p#T cfi9arette, but levels as high as 800 ug/cigarette have been reported . Methods to
the hydrogen cyanide content of cigarette snoke are available . The Threshold
Yalue for the comoound is 10 ppm or 11 nanograms/ml (about one one-hundredth of the
level in cigarette smoke)• .
:3egislation to require the reporting of hydrogen cyanide delivery of each Aaerican

6~;,~i11 be enacted . As in the case of "tar" and nicotine, the FTC will probably ,
conduct the analyses for hydrogen cyanide in smoke .
WILL BE ITS IMPACT/I!!PLICATION
~.F A hydrogen cya "derby" will result .
king product~ ; w 1 be manipulated to reduce hydrogen cyanide deliveries by
o us~ f~ppro te aTr d lution and/or filtration systems, filter-tip additives,
ate bl . ...d•s, e . .
ubiic ~ ~atiomor blems will arise .
4
EN WILL IT HA
Wetween 1983 a$5 .
5 .~ ~XIRCES OF ENVIRONMENTAI ANALYSES FORECASTS AFID RATIONALE
awd n the READER'S DIGEST article (October 1976) on carbon monoxide, it was noted
& n":L.1a folla~r-up article will discuss hydrogen cyanide in tobacco smoke In the same
as carbon monoxide was discussed in the .October article. The alTeged hazards
drogen cyanide in cigarette smoke are discussed by Wynder and Hoffmann in "Tobacco
bacco Smoke," Academic Press, 1967, 451-453 ; by Larson and Silvette in "Tobacco :
M imental and Clinical Studies, "~pl . III, Williams and Wilkins Co ., 1975,
~1 ~<. .'; 163, 279, 292, 298 ; Suppl . II, 1971, 112, 115, 205 ; Suppl . I, 1_968, 1N; 136,
0
275, 606, 613. •
R J R24277
r
A
N
J
.
* Z; :,o.~:~ :z
i ..t .
. 42
• . POSITION PAPER - FORMAL GOCUMENTATION
SHOKING AhD HEALTH : PRODUCT AND SMOKE C01•1PONENTS
PRODUCT CO;IPONENTS : C.2 . Gas-Phase Ca•mponents . d . Hydro_yen Sulfide

1 . TRENDs, ISSUE, OR EVENTS IOENTIFIEn/DESChIBED
To date very little has been written concerning the alleged toxicity of hydrogen
su id in cigarette smoke . Early reports on hydrogen sulfic'e indicate levels between
15 and 390 ug/cigarette, but more recent studies indicate levels of less than
10 '` igarette . Hydrogen sulfide in'the usual acute and chronic toxicity laboratory
teft s r1ith laboratory animals is found to be as toxic as hydrogen cyanide and has the
sa itted Threshold Limit Value of 10 ppm in the work place .
2. WWILL HAPPEN
is predicted that proponents of the smoking-health theory, if sJccessful .in
th -••empts to obtain le3islation for the reporting of carbon monoxide, nitrogen
ox s and hydrogen cyanide, will turn their attention to hydrogen sulfide .•
Ev ____._ ...__. ly, legislation will be enacted for the required reporting of this corrponent .
3 . Y.FL'1T ::ILL SE ITS ~I/iMPLICATION .
~».
drogen sulfi)ft " erby" will result .
~)king proOuct ili be manipulated to control hydrogen sulfide deliveries
NO f aoppip#late I dilution andJor filtration systems, filter additives, .
Fnate bVep ft;, etc•~ .
lic rela•.ion oblems Mi11 arise . '
ut 1985 . '
3, RCES OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSESlFORECASTS AND RATIONALE
POW
drogen sulfide in cigarette smoke is discussed by Larson and Silvette in
"iofiwio : Experimental and Clinical Studies," Suppl . III, Williams and Wilkins Co .,
197
a d
cy° . ;<
V
.
M >`
N .~
~ . .
. RJR2427$ ' ~,
~Aj,V
.••i
. .. . .. . r . - • ~ 3„ > . . _. .. . , • _ .
0
~
SM~KIttG ANO f1EAt7N: PROOUC'. €~O
1977 - 1989
Probabtlt ot•Occtrrrence ~ -~'"~ Est/meteQ I ct I ltutions + or Earl test

~ Possible
Key Issues Q~+a nttta;S • L rear of
on Sales Prottts _
Qualitative Occurrence
lOt 30t SOt 70% 90% l0!/Yea Svrv4. .#i
I .A• PROOUCT ~
ConQeanation of nicotine X • •• • ~ t••6owere0 'tar' and nicotine on established brands ; If 1971
as health hazard by some (to 1983) lowerin9 of •tar` and nicotine progresses too far,
smoking-health proponents customers weaned froa~ smoking with subsequent sales
tncreased demand for low- ' - decliae .
nicotine tobaccos . (after 198 ) • flew brand opportunities .
(cf• pp . 7-8, 28) • Decline in smoking satisfaction 1n terms of both flaror
and physiological i .pact. .
~~ • Oeelfne of unit growth of Industry .
Some s.~oking-fr,~alth pro- • 8rana proliferation . ,
ponents allege sawke •. Low-nicotine tobaccos cotiw+Q prei .ius price .
nicotine Aarmful ;
simultaneous lowering ~ C~qlexity of low-'tar"/lox-ntcotine products 1n terms of
of "tar' and nicotine blend, air 011vtton/ftltration systems, manufacture,
~~d, denieotiniration, etc ., substantially reduces profit
aarqin .
(cf . pp . 15-17, 38) •
• I~nproved flavorant systems repvired as 'tar• delfrery
lowered.
• • Rccovery systems for nicotine and flavorants lost during
' tobacco processing (613, drying) . ,
~ • AOw~rse PR from smoking-health proponents who recoaa~end •
r increase0 nieotine .
N ' •
~ .
.,---^'.--
0
produ~eciw ' RJ] . 'I' C a
:0
ir
In
Probability of Occurrence Estimated Iapact Impiications (+ or -)• Earliest
Posssble
. . Kqy Issaes Year of
Occarrence -
~~ QualStattve
0% 30% SGZ 70% 90% ,
c% 1978
L8 . PROplfCT X ~
Many smokers continue to • New brand opportunities In low-•tar', increased nicotine
smoke despite health ute9ory.
clales ; recognizing tMs, a Smoke nicotine delivery should not exceed that in
some smolr.ng-Aealtn pro- tull-flevor cigarettes .
ponents reccmeend low-
;0 and aeedivo-•tar' cig- a Decline Sn smoker satisfaction Sn term of flavor but
T c_ arettes with 'tar'/ Saprovement in terms of pl8rsioto9ful Smpact .
N nicotine ratio less than • Ni9A-nieotine tobaccos reQuired .
8: tliqt,-nicotine •tobacco
~r 4 ~ and/or nicotine source . • Nicotine sonrce repuired : synthesis should selectively
N ` "epoired. provide correct Ssomer.
4 • laproved flavorant systems required as •tar" delivery
00 (cf . pp . 7-8 . 28)
lowered .
SypOCX . Recovery systems for nicotine and flavorants lost
dMrtn9 tobacco processin4 (G13, dryinq, etc .) '
Some smoking-health pro-
ponents allege smoke a Adve* PR froo smoking-health proponents who
nicotine harmless but reccmmend decreased nicotine.
-tar' harmful ; since ~
s1EClcers cCntinUe to
smoke despite health •
claims, lowered 'tar• •
delivery and tncreased
nicotine delivery
recanaended by these .
proponents•
(cf . pp . 1 ;-17, 38)
M
t
.:.~ .._~ . . r ...~~-w• . .- .~.,r,ra . .-• .... ._. . r•:..•.. .,w ... .~ .. - . . . . . . . .
r
.
NOTES ON KEY ISSUE I
(1) Because of the interrelationship between nicotine

in tobacco and nicotine in sr.•oke, the smoking-health
aspects of nicotine'às both a product and smoke
component are discussed in this section . •
(2) It may appear anomalous to indicate both low-
and high-nicotine as key issues, but the consumer's
consideration of nicotine as either harmful or harmless
will be the force dictating his cigarette selection
in terms of nicotine delivery at a given "tar" level . ,
R J R2428 1 . .••c•• . .• .•. . . ..tl. :asi

,~v.J~. .~'.~- .r
Gr .~~....~
rit.v,7 .
: . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . __ . . . . . ~r~ ~ .
pr o duced lNy ..
probabili •of Occurrence

-a-
V M EsLl meted tapatt Lnplications (+ or - :arliest
Posfible
Q' n ~ S '~ive : Effect year of
on Sa"tet~?rofits Qualitative Occurreccc
70% 190% t
Flarorants . added to tobacco ana/or • Mandatory labelling for all flarorants not occurringi 19E0 •
filter but not naturally occurring naturally in tobacco or saaks . ,
In tobacco or saoke, alieyed by •+Government interrention for complete evaluation i
sacktnq-health proponents to of a1l flavorants .'e . 9. FOA . fi
increase smoke toxicity because of
their transfer intact to smoke and/o# • Decline in smoking flaror satisfaction if certain t
their decoaposition to alie9edly proprietary flarorants dlleted from cavany products~
har+eful smoke components during the • oamonstration that certain proprietary flavorants
sm*in9 process . are Indeed tobacco or smoke canponents . '
.cf . pp . 10. 13,33) • Legislation to Place flarorant use under 9orernaenta
health agency (FDA) .
• Loss of profit pro1eeted from replacea:ent of 1owcos
~ tobacco treated with Turkish-type flavorant for j
high-cost Twrkish : prohibition of Turkish-type
flavorants necessitates continued purchase of
Turkish .
• Cemonstration of safety of specific flarorants
Oy Inexpensive short-term In vitro test (Ames Test) .
f
.
•
S' a: . ..:.: . .
::::: - . . . -'
.. . . ~ .. .. ..
.. . ... . ;:
:. . Z£9i _6t?OOZ ':. :

~37cr V car'M aRi?OR IN ftNrr s 'XI.IMO
v ta,
.• ,
~ _ _ ,. :. :.:: . . :::. . . . . . ::. . . . . : : :. . . . . . . . :: . . . . : ::. : :::: .:::::::. .. ..:..
... . . . . . -< . :::.. . . . .., . . . . :. . . . : :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. :
. .. .. .. . r« _ . 66TS OILIS . ~. .:.rr . .• .. '
• p rodu ce 0
Probability of Occurrenci V 11 Estimated Iapact Implications (* or -)•

Qv~ntiì 1ve : Ettect
on Sales/Profits Qualitative .
~ III . 'Tar• condeined by siaoking-health • Lowered •tar• on established brands .

proponcnt, as prime risk factor • dnnd proliferation
in siaoking ; publicized at
continually increasing level by . • itaw brand op ortunities .
anta9onistic 9overnfnental and • Oecllne in smoker satisfaction (flavor) and unit
ffedical agencies despite further growth in tndustry .
reducttons In •tar" deliveries .
Realization by smoking-health • Cantfnual lowering of •tar• delivery weans light
proponents that 'tar• nuabers saakers (less than half pack/day) to quitting
Senerated by machine smoking point; loss of sales .
not aean :n9ful In terms of humen • fSandatory labelling for •tar• delivery at
smoking Labtts . Increased puff volume.
(cf . pp . 15, 37) • Uaproved flavor systems required as "tar' lowered .
.
Ot
I
i
/ i
Est mated •Impact Implications (+ or -)• Earliest
ProOability of Occurrence . Possible
tcey Issues Qq ' tative : Effect year of
I on Sales/Profits Qualitative Occurrenr
1 0% 30% 50% 1 70% 1 91 Year urv va ~
IY . Carbon mrnoxide indicted by smoking-

health proponents as harmful
a Carbon monoxide "derby' . 1 19?9 .
•mandatory labelling on cigarette package : extensive

i'nqredient of mainstream (and . involvement of R & 0 , Legal . in assuring correct-
environoental) smoke and publicized . . hess of analytical and reporting methods .
by antagonistic governmental and , .
medical agencies . . • Reduced carbon monoxide levels on estabtished b rands ,
~
(cf. pp . 20-21, 39) • Proliferation of brands with claims specifically
directed at :carbon monoxide level .
,.
• Decline in unit cigarette growth .
/ •?remenaons advantage to industry member discovering
effective and practical sidestrean carbon monoxide
~ control system .
x . . Increased re9ulations on smoking in public places : 1979
I. Envtroesnental smoke eonde`rr+ed by
smoking-health proponents as work places, etc .
hazardous to both the lutlft • Cecline in sales because of smoker's consumption
and ailing nonsmoker . limited to lunch, coffee breaks . during work Aours . !
.
(cf . pp . 14-1s . 36) • opportanities for new brands with reduced sides 'trea%
' smoke . 'tar", nicotine, carbon aonoxide . hydrogen '
.
cyanide, etc .
• Srand proliferation.
• tiandatory labelling for sidestreaai •tar", nicotine,
carbon eonoxide .
• + • opportllnity
- • threat
,
,
IOZS OILIS ~.~ . . . . .• .~• r ~__.. .._
. ..• .1T~^VYO.~•+f :v . .•T .! .wA'Y/. ..(.M~. .T' . ~ .. • .•V . .. .. uo~• .. . . . . .. . . . .
JEfl)dJ)Ce
-1
Probability of Occurrence Estimated Impact Implications (* or . Earliest

31
. Possible
Key Issues . mitative : Effect year of
on Sales/Profits Qvalitatire O:cnrrenc
10: 30% S0: 70S 90 ur~c va
YI . Tobacw substitutes endorsed by • Competitor markets cigarette contatniAg substitute : 1982
smoking-health proponents as tobacco blend.
effective means to reduce alleged
health hazards from smoke . • RJR responds by marketing cigarette containing
JlO :tobacco blend . (
(cf . pp. 6-7, 27)
• RJR profit margin substantially greater than that ~
of competitor because of cost of J10 relative to ,
other substitutes (Cytrel, NSti), expanded natu itre
ot J10.
Y11 . Nitraqdn oxides indieted by smoking- • 1H tro4en oxides •derby` . 1983
health procronents as harmful
ingredients of .rinstream (and • Mandatory labelling on cigarette packs9•st extensive .
enyiroanental) smoke and publicized involvement of R : 0, Legal In assuring correctness!
by antagonistic yoveraoental and of analytical ud repprting Methods .
oedtat agencies .
El
• Reduced nitrogen oxides on established brands . .
(cf. pp. 21, 40) • • Pro1lferation of brands with c1aim specifically
directed at nitrogen oxides level .
f
• Decline in unit cigarette growth .
• TreeenftA advantage to ind:atry member discovering
effective and practical nitrogen oxides control
system.
.
+ • opportunity .
• • threat
F
,
,
.
11 -A~~ ARDEtt IN 1'P 1SX~.'~i~N~

..: .
:. . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . :. . . . ..: <::.... . ... : . . . : . .. ., . . :: : ::.. ;;;;: ;- ;::>::::::::
..
::.
r
w :
ZAZ S OTLTS
. ;+
Probability of Occrirrence Estiee3ted Impact Implica :ions (' or Earliest

:ossible
Key Issues year of
~o•.~i Sa1es%PrWofiLifect Qualitattve . Occurrence
10% V3ox I sos
VIII . Hydrogen cyanide indicted by • Hydrogen cyanide 'derby" . 1983

smoking-health proponents as
. • Manaatory labelling on cigarette packages ; extensi
harmful Ingredient of mainstream involvement of R & 0, Legal in assuring correct-
(and environmental) smoke and ness of analytical and report :n9 methods .
publici=ed by antagonistic
9overnmental and medical agencies M • Reduced fUrdro9en cyanide on established brands .
(cf . pp. 21-22, 41) • Proliferation of brands with claims specifically
directed at-tqrdroqen cyanide levels .
• Oecline in unit cigarette growth .
IX . Use of stem sheet in exc4ss of • Need for alternate way to utilize steals . 1901
2SZ criticized by smoking-health
i proponents as contributor to • Modification of steps of stem sheet to reduce
allegedly harmful gas-phase generation of gas-phase conponents .
oomponents tn smoke . • Reduced profit margin if complete return of steo
(cf. pp . S-6, 26) - hampered by these clat,cs .
• Major revision of blends .
-T . I f t 1
o . .~. '
/'
© .
Q1Qi~~1~A : . ....
----. . . . . .._~. . . .. . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . :>:.>.....
: . ... . . . .:...::.::..: . . . .. . .. .
EOZS 0ILI5
..
; rod~ceb `~.
~ Estimated Impact LplScattons (+ or Etrllest
Probabtltty•ot Occurrence PossSble
ICey Issues Qtl~Rn~t#1re : Effect year of
~ oir~St~al!ProtZts Qual (tatlYe Occurrencc
10% 30% SOY 70% 1 90% r va
X . Wcoa , used as casing a+atertal 1n

smokS "9 products, condemrKd h'
snokfng•healtA proponents .as
' t precursor
a11cged1y Aarmfu1 •
J 11 : •
R etonvu,atton of ex,sttn9 D1ends .
Search tor acuptable coooa altcrnate .
• Kandatory cocoa labelli n g on cigarette package .-
i~ 1480
,
•
o 1
4 coqonent in smoke . • Ilew brand opportunltles . ,
(cf . pp . 10, 31) • Provision of data to discount clatms . ~
X1 . Dye systans, used to color ' X (-~ • Mandatory labeilSng for qye system on cigarette ' 19E0
cigarette or cigar wrapper, package. ~
condemned by saoktag'realth • Yaltdatton ot futvre ay systems .
proponents as precvrsors ot i
allegedly harmful eompontnts •'Opportunttleslror new brandt with yred wrapper .
tn smoke.
(cf. pp. 13, 3S)
. ~
I 0
/ 8
~ .~~ , . .. . . .. ...,~..y.+ . . . .ra.w..~'t`.r .r•.. :•r .• . Dr'

.a
VOZS OZLIS
• pr o d uce d *o JJ1
. . .TC A/
r, _
Qualitative
XII . Residual Freon 11 le :als In prodwc • Alternate expansion process .

,containin4 expanded tobacco • Reduction in use level of Freon 11-expanded
coMennea as health hazard by tobacco with accompanin9 reduction in profit In
smoking-health proponents . both in-hwm and licensee payments .
(cf . pp . S-6, 26) • Reduction of resi0ual Freon 11- to level acceptable
V
to smokin9-tealth proponents .
XIII . Hrdrogen sulfide Indicted by • lRyQro3en sulfide •derby' . ~ 1965

saokinq-bealth proponents as harmfu • Mandatory labellin9 on cigarette packages ; extensive
Ingredient of mainstream (and involvement of R & 0, Legal in assuring correct-
environa~ental) smoke and publicized ness of an3lyticas and reportin9 methods . {
by antagonistic 4overnxntal and
medical agencies . . • Reduced Iprdro"n sulfiQe on established brands . 'f
(cf. pp . 22-23,42)
` + a opportunity
- - threat
h1--M Y;I' ORDFR!xN Pr.w i .
50ZS 0tiLti5 • . -- . . : . . . . . - . . . . . ,
RTC
Probabiltty of Occyrnnce Estimated Iapact Implications (r or Earliest

Possible
Key Issues Qlta •tfitttve : Effect ' year of
on Sales/Profiu ~ Qualitative . occvrrence
1~ ~ `
•'~ 2~ ~ r r va
XIV . Previously used or new filter . X ( • Canpetitor SntroducM s/perior carbon-filter with 1983
materials effective in reducing
qas-phase components appear in
response to allegations by
-
d _' H no urbon-filter, off-taste .
• New brand opportunities . !
saokin9-Aeaith proponents that • a Mandatory labelling for alieyed harmful components ~
such components are harioful . (e .Q ., aldehydes) readily removed by carbon. ,
(cf. pp . 12, 34) ~ • Proliferation of carbon filter brands . ~
Decline in sales of conventional filter brands .
4 as
XY . Svgar, a ded cusin9 material
saqktn9 products, condeaned as pre-
to X (-i • Reformulation existing
of blends . ~ 1981
cursor smoking-health
of all .yedly harmful coapo-
• Reduction of profit sr9in (tobacco aore costly than;
s~r . t
nents in smoke by
' proponents . • New brand opportunities. 1
cf . . 9 29 • Manda s ar labeili on cS rette acka t .

,
XVI. flue-cYred tobacco becavsc
by of high X - • Major
revision blends . 1983
sugar content condemned
healt .~ proponents
s~aokiny-
as cancer; push
contributor
• Restrvctartnq of tobacco
boprinq Prograe~s .
to respiratory tract • Alteration of tobacco-growing
practices In
for lower-svpr strains, removal
or reduction of fl•e-cured .
Southeast U . S . A.
• Search for lower-sugar flue-cureds : prdnia
t ~(d . pp . S . 25) ' price on such tosaccos .
UO
.. . /
..................
l~?iYY "A
..
:
~J)aCT'1~ eoNk~~i~'x~A~~
. ....:,.~RDE1't
. . . : IN PENNS '!f~A' :
.. . ._ ... ... . .. . :.:..::.. .::::...:.. . .. ...... _. : .. .:. . . ,, . .:,,;,
. ...
90ZS OZLZS
Y
pioduuda . :RJ C . T
probaOSlity o: Occurrence ' :stia~ated Impact Implications (+ or Earliest

poss ible
Xe; Issues 30% . t~Zative : Effect i yttr ot
on Sales/ProfSLs Qualitative +/Occrnnce
lOt SOS y0t 90S :
x • urvwa
XVII . ticoric^, used as casing a~aterSal X (•_ • Reformulation of existing blends . 1482 .
Sn smokinq prodacts, condenned • SearcA for acceptable licorice alternate .
by smoking-health proponents
as precursor of alle9edly harmful • lte+r brand .opportunities .
cwponents in saalce . . • Mandatory licorice labelling on cigarette pacta9l•n9l
(ct. pp . 9-10, 3D) • provision of data to discount claims .
XVIII . Glycerol and other hunectantt X (-) • Mandatory Mumectant labelling on cigarette ackage. 1982
currently used in smokin9 products • Reformulation of existing humectants and blends .
condeer.ed as precursors of
allegeQly lumful components in a Search for acceptable s•bstitute both for use in
~ sinoke by smokin9-tKa1tA proponents i product and aanutacturSrA operation .
C- (cf . pp . 10. 32) • Provision of data to discount claims . '
;U
J
~
/
J
~ , -
, .
' + • opporturtity N
Y
- • threa t
On'TASM:
.
. '~.. . .. . . • . . . .4; . ~ . .. .
LOZS OiLIS i~ .i~•.* ..r..J- X 'S"46

I-RoR'3
51710 5208
I. ~ : . . . V. .l t~S{l
~ RDR, 1954, Nos . 1-13 - DESTROYED
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS RDR - 1954

if- 9- 4"7
.•
1%, to . Date Title Author
1 4/26/54 DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPRESSOMETER FOR MEASURING THE E .Barnhardt

FILLING CAPACITY OF CIGARETTE CUT TOBACCO
2 6/7/54 PREPARATION OF CYCLOPENTANECARBOXYLIC ACID 6 .E . Teague
3 7/2/54 THE PREPARATION OF 3-METEiYLVALERIC ACID C .E . Teague
4 7/6/54 DETERMINATION OF TOTAL REDUCING SUGARS IN TOBACCO Cundif f

AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS BY THE SOMOGYI PROCEDURE
5 7/14/54 DETERMINATION OF ALKALOIDS IN TOBACCO AND TOBACCO ® Cundiff

PRODUCTS
6 7/16/54 SYNTHESIS OF FATTY ACID CARRIERS Rowland, Giles,Aasic
7 8/20/54 TURKISH :TOBACCO . PROGRESS REPORT ON THE ISOLATION Latimer, Ashburn,Jonc

11ND IDENTIFICATION OF SOME OF ITS CONSTITUENTS
8 8/23/54 INVESTIGATION OF THE ANTHRONE COLORIMETRIC PROCEDURE Cundiff x

FOR SUGAR DETERMINATION
+ 9 8/23/54 ISOLATION OF CONSTITUENTS OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Rowland ;
_' 10 10/6/54 DETERMINATION OF CHLORIDE IN TOBACCO PRODUCTS Harrell k

11 11/4/54 CHEMICAL MODIFICATION OF BURLEY TOBACCO Tompson X
12 11/12/54 SMOKING QUALITY OF TOBACCO STEMS Tompson x
13 12/17/54 NICOTINE DERIVATIVES C .E . Teague x
14 12/20/54 SOME jr-BUTYROLACTONES C .E . Teague k
15 7/26/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD . RESEARCH REPORT, 4TH QUARTER - 1954 Penick & Ford
~ ( . 0
RDR, 1955, Nos . 1-14 - DESTROYED 4- 9%~

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS (RDR) - 1955
leo . Date Title Author
1 1/6/55 alpha-SUBSTITUTED-gamma-BUTYROLACTONES AS FLAVORANTS Tompson, C . G ~(
2 3/28/55 SYNTHESIS OF FATTY ACID CARRIERS Hosick, T ~(
3 2/11/55 TREATMENT OF BURLEY TOBACCO WITH WATER AS A MEANS Tompson,C .G• x

OF DECREASING HARSHNESS
4 3/3/55 THE POTASSIUM, CALCIUM, AND SOLUBLE ASH CONTENT OF Elliott 3 . 8 . tl-
AGING TOBACCO
5 3/21/55 FLUORESCENT COMPOUNDS IN TOBACCO Bellin
6 3/29/55 QUATERNARY AMMONIUM HYDROXIDES AS TITRANTS FOR Cundif f

ACIDS IN NONAQUEOUS SOLUTIONS
7 4/8/55 FLAVORING ACIDS IN TURKISH TOBACCO Schumacher `+ .
8 8/4/55 DETERMINATION OF ACIDS IN SMOKE Cundiff
9 8/22/55 J TURKISH TOBACCO SECOND PROGRESS REPORT ON THE Henley &

ISOLATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF SOME OF ITS Mays
CONSTITUENTS
' r10 8/31/55 THE PREPARATION OF POLYVINYL ESTERS OF SOME FIVE- Teague, C .E . ~C
~ AND SIX-CARBON FATTY ACIDS
0 11 10/17/55 THE COMPOSITION OF THE VAPOR PHASE OF CIGARETTE SMOKE Laurene ~

12 11/9/55 ORGANIC ACIDS IN THE GROWING TOBACCO PLANT Smeby & Bellin *C
13 12/7/55 QUANTITATIVE STUDIES OF THE MICROBIOLOGICAL FLORA Flanders Y,

OF TOBACCO DURING AGING
=,5
14 12/27/55 J A7*SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC METHOD4OR THE DETERMINATION 0F Laurene &

VICOTINE IN CIGARETTE SMOKE, Harrell
15 7/26/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD . RESEARCH REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1965 Penick & Ford
16 7/26/66 DITTO 2ND QUARTER - 1955 ~ Ditto

Ln
17 7/26/66 DITTO • 3RD QUARTER - 1955 Ditto ~
~
~
18 7/26/66 DITTO 4th QUARTER - 1955 Ditto m
7..2 Z-7o
~' ~
RDR, 1956, Nos . 1-12 - •DESTROYED ~~ :~'~
.I
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS (RDR) - 1956
*No . Date Title Author
1 2/3/5,6' SYNTHESIS OF AMIDES AND RELATED NITROGEN-CONTAINING Hosick X

, COMPOUNDS FOR USE AS TURKISH-TYPE ACID CARRIERS
,,y . . . . ... _.. .
2 2/ 15 / 56 rp):fiARMX,NATION ' OF ; . TOTAL' BAS ES ,. ~N CIGARETTE SMOKE Sullivan &
Harrell
3 3/22/56 PUNCH CARD CODE FOR AGING STUDY DATA Smeby X
4 4/4/56 PHENOLS AND PHENOLIC PIGMENTS IN TOBACCO Smeby
5 6-29-56 THE DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE IN TOBACCO BY Laurene & ~

KARL FISCHER REAGENT Sullivan /`
DETERMINATION OF MENTHOt IN MENTHOLATED TOBACCO Harrell >(

6 7/31/56
THE REACTION OF ISOBUTYL BROMIDE WITH M6 .LONIC ESTER Snyder, Harry , x
7 8 -8 -56
ISOLATION OF NEOPHYTADIENE FROM FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Rowland
8 9 -7 -56
9 9-28-56 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . I . THE Rodgman _
ISOLATION AND/OR IDENTIFICATION OF POLYCYCLIC .

AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS IN CAMEL CIGARETTE SMOKE 11116 Jsl. 42~t %9~J
CONDENSATE
00 10-1-56 THE PREPARATION OF SOME PHENOLIC FLAVORANTS Rodgman
11 10-31-56 THE REACTION OF SEC-BUTYL BROMIDE WITH DIETHYL SEC- Snyder, Harry x .
BUTYIMALONATE
•1
12 11-1-56 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . II . THE PRE-

TREATMENT OF CAMEL BLEND TOBACCO
r-AXID • f -1 ,-V .
S-Rf t-J-/ f
13 7/27/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD . RESEARCH REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1956 1 Penick & Ford
14 7/27/66 DITTO 2ND QUARTER - 1956 Ditto
15 7/27/66 DITTO 3RD QUARTER - 1956 X Ditto
16 7/27/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1956 Ditto
N
O
~
~
N
p
J
N
4
RDR, 1957, Nos . 1-21 - DESTROYED
1tESEARCti DEPARTMQiT REPORTS - (RDR) - 1957
4'~ r o2.-i9-JI
"• Date Title Author
0 1/10/57 A STUDY OF THE AGING OF TURKISH TOBACCOS Latimer x

:: : .
2 1/30/57 ~I TURKISti -4O8A"CC0 . THIRD PROGRESS REPORT ON THE•ISOLATION AND SchumaC
IDENTIFICATION OF SOME OF ITS CONSTITUENTS
3 2/1/57 PROCESS FOR PRODUCTION OF DISODIUM sec-BUTYL-MALONATE AND Mays & ?\agu
DISODIUM ISOPROPYIMALONATE ; LABORATORY DEVELOPMENT E.
4 3/14/57 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . III . FLUE-CURED- Rodgma ~~ .;

ToBACCO F . T. a, S-it • .t'7 ) a,1Z . 7• ; 9- d;7
•5 3/15/57 DETERMINATION•OF NITRATES IN TOBACCO AND TOBACCO STEMS Harrell
6 5/21/57 VOLUMETRIC ANALYSIS OF DISODIUM sec-BUTYL MALONATE AND Cundiff X

DISODIUM ISOPROPyIMALONATE
5/30/57 METABOLIC PRODUCTS FORMED BY THE ACTION OF ARTHROBACTER OXYDANS ZimmermanX

ON NICOTINE
8 6/7/57 /THE ESTIMATION OF PENTANOIC AND HEXANOIC ACIDS IN TOBACCO AND Latimer 37-
TOBACCO SMOKE USING GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY
6/13/57,/ TURKISH'TOBACCO - FOURTH PROGRESS REPORT - ISOLATION AND Schumacti .~,dr

.
IDENTIFICATION OF SCLAREOLIDE
~ 6/13/57 FATE OF ALKYIMALONIC ACIDS DURING SMOKING Giles ® F
11 9/24/57 INVESTIGATION OF DILUTE SOLUTIONS OF TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM HYDROXIDE Sensabaugh -

AS BASIC TITRANTS IN NONAQUEOUS SOLUTIONS Cundiff X
12 10/2/57 DETERMINATION OF 2,4-DINITROPHENYPiYDRAZONES BY TITRATION WITH Sensabau* 6

TETRABUTYLAMHONIUM HYDROXIDE ~ Cundiff j `-
13 10/7/57 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . IV . Rodgma

3,4,8,9-DIBENZPYRENE IN CAMEL CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE
14 10/10/57 `' THE. .FATE'OF"DISODIUM .ISOPROF~LMALONATE DURING SMOKING . •A`STABLE Latimer ¢t~~ 1
ISOTOPE STUDY .
10/10/57 PREPARATION OF SOME TERPENOID ETHERS Gilesx

15
10/11/57 THE PREPARATION OF SCLAREOLIDE BY THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL SchumacherX

16
17 10/23/57 ' Cb[~USTION-ZONE TEMPERATURES OF CIGARETTES Tompson

~
18 10/28/57 EVALUATION OF THE SARGENT_MAIMSTADT AUTOMATIC TITRATOR Cundiffxr
,
19 ~à {{~ 0~ 0 E" D~ . ISOLATION OF STEROLS FROM FLUE-CURED TOBAC~, (VOID - SEE RDR, ;
~y!*" .1958, No . 1) .,~~. ':I
'ti3 :a .. r . . ..
'.7' 12/16/57 DETERMINATION OF TRIACETIN IN FILTER ,PLUGS

. .. . p
21 12/17/57 ANALYSIS OF 3,5-DINITROBENZOATES BY TITRATION WITH TETRA- Sensabaugh &

BUTYLAZ4fONIUM HYDROXIDE Cundiff A
51710 5213
. -/ + //-
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - 1957
RDR - /J`44#-~
Na L .. Date
1957
0 5/17/66 PENICK & FORD RESEARCH REPORT, FIRST QUARTER, 1957 P&F
23 5/17/66 PENICK & FORD RESEARCH REPORT, SECOND QUARTER, 1957 P&F
24 5/17/66 PENICK & FORD RESEARCH REPORT, THIRD QUARTER, 1957 P&F
25 5/17/66 PENICK & FORD RESEARCH REPORT, FOURTH QUARTER, 1957 P&F
6
b
i
i
i
{
• ~.
'RLSEAItCri DEPARTMENT REPORTS - (RDR) - 1958 RDR, 1958, Nos . 1-22 - DESTROYED
No . Date Author
1/24/58 ~/ ISOLATION OF STEROLS FROM FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Rowlan&

~
. 2/10/58 AN ISOTOPE DILUTION ANALYSIS FOR ISOPROPYLMALONIC ACID Latimerx
3 2/18/58 ~ ISOLATION OF a-TOCOPHEROL & SOLANACHROMENE FROM FLUE-CURED

TOBACCO Rowland
4 3/14/58 PRELIMINARY STUDIES OF CIGARETTE TASTE TESTING METHODS Bellin & Nyst~om
5 3/19/58 ANALYSIS OF SUBSTITUTED MALONIC ESTERS BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY Latimer (è~C
6 3/19158 A STUDY OF THE AGING OF THE 1952 TURKISH TOBACCOS . THE

THIRD YEAR Latimer X
.
7 4/29/58 TURKISH TOBACCO ISOLATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF DEHYDRO- Giles &
~
SCLAREOLIDE Schumacher
8 6/2/58 DETERMINATION OF PROPYLENE GLYCOL AND GLYCEROL IN TOBACCO
9 6/13/58 AN IMPROVED QUATERNARY AMMONIUM HYDROXIDE TITRANT FOR STRONG

ACIDS
10 6/13/58 REACTION OF SOLVENTS WITH STRONG ACIDS AS DETERMINED BY

TITRATION WITH TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM HYDROXIDE
'' 6/13/58 DETERMINATION OF STRONG ACID MIXTURES BY TITRATION WITH

TETRABUTYLAMhIONIUM HYDROXIDE
~
1% 6/19/58 VIISOLATION OF SOLANESYL ESTERS FROM FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Rowland b~+''~timez
13 7/9/58 REDUCTION'OF ALKALOIDS AND AMMONIA IN TOBACCO WITH THE AID

OF MAGNESIUM HYDROXIDE Ashburn ~`;i . ~
J
14 7/30/58 THE HEAT TREATMENT OF TOBACCO IN THE LEGG DUNMURRY ROTARY ~
m
PANNER~ kSawyer
15 7/30/58 NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF INORGANIC SALTS WITH TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM

HYDROXIDE x Cundiff
16 10/6/58 AN ISOTOPE DILUTION ANALYSIS FOR SECONDARY-BUTYI2•lALONIC ACID Latimer &'WiZes
17
18
11/7/58
12/1/58
ANALYSIS OF 3,5-DINITROBENZOATES
THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . V . THE

x Robinson*
POLYCYCLIC HYDROCARBON PRECURSORS IN TOBACCO Rodgman & Coo
19 12/8/58 ANALYSIS OF 2,4,7-TRINITROFLUORENONE-POLYNUCLEAR HYDROCARBON

COMPLEXES BY TITRATION WITH TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM HYDROXIDE Cundif f N
0
~
Newel lx ot
u 12/12/58 ANALYSIS OF SCLAREOL BY ISOTOPE DILUTION N
O
.
12/10/58 STUDY OF TOBACCOPRETREATMENTS Ashburn ~'r'? o I
~
22 12/31/58 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE VII . SOLANESYL AND Rod n& Cook
SOLANESYL ACETATE
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1958
'"") . Date Ti t le Author(s)
PENICK & FORD, LTD ., RESEARCH REPORT, 1ST QUARTER, 1958 Penick & Ford
23 5/16/66
PENICK & FORD, LTD ., RESEARCH REPORT, 4TH QUARTER - 1958 Penick & Ford
24 5/16/66
25 7/27/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD ., RESEARCH REPORT, 2ND QUARTER - 1958 Penick & Ford
x
26 7/27/66 DITTO 3RD QUARTER - 1958 Ditto
RDR, 1959, Nos . 1-23 - DESTROYED
1/301j61
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1959 Page 1
• Date
1 . 1/29/59 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . VI . THE INFLUENCE

OF SOLVENT PRETREATMENT OF TOBACCO AND OTHER FACTORS ON THE
POLYCYCLIC HYDROCARBON CONTENT OF SMOKE CONDENSATE .
2 2/10/59 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . VIII . SOLANESYL Rodgma

ESTERS AND PHYTOSTERYL ESTERS
3 3/16/59 THE USE OF IBM METHODS FOR HANDLING AND INTERPRETING DATA WITH Bellin x
SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE AGING OF TOBACCO
4 3/23/59 / FURTHER STUDIES ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE LIPID FRACTIONS OF Rowland

FLUE-CURED TOBACCO
5 4/17/59 AN .APPARATUS FOR THE COLLECTION OF MAINSTREAM AND SIDESTREAM Haefele

SMOKES : THE ANALYSIS OF THE SMOKE FRCht CIGARETTES MADE WITH
A SPECIAL POROUS PAPER
Fredrickson
6 4/27/59 THE PREPARATION OF REFERENCE 2,4-DINITROPHENYLHYDRAZONES FOR Chappell4s,
NINETY-ONE CARBONYL CONIPOUNDS Rodgman
7 4/28/59 THE DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE IN LICORICE BY KARL FISCHER Sullivan x

REAGENT
~ 5/12/59 PILOT PLANT STUDY OF THE PRODU,CTION OF DISODIUM ISOPROPYL- Teague + x

MALONATE AND DISODIUM sec-BUTYIMALONATE Mays
9 5/15/59 PROCESS FOR PRODUCING SCLAREOLIDE FRCM SCLAREOL : LABORATORY Henley, W~sc
. DEVELOPMENT & Teague .
t~s
10 5/18/59 V TURKISH TOBACCO - THE ISOLATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF SCLARAL Schumaches~. ; t
®
11 5/18/59 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . IX . PHYTADIENES
I
12 5/21/59 TURKISH TOBACCO . ISOLATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF AMBREINOLIDE Schumact~d.' .. &
Bernase~'~' ~
13 5/21/59 A RAPID OPTICAL METHOD FOR THE DETERMINATION OF SCLAREOL Laurene & X
i Greene
14 6/22/59 MODIFICATION OF THE EXTRACTION PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF Cundif f A

ALICALOIDS IN TOBACCO ~.~
15 6/24/59 / SCME VOLATILE CONSTITUENTS OF CELLULOSE SMOKE Fredrickson
a
0
r
~
N
F
51710 5217 J
W
N
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1959 Page 2
„" Date Author
16 7/13/59 TURKISH TOBACCO . CHARACTERIZATION OF COMPOUNDS II AND III Gi1es„
17 7/21/59 ATTEMPTED SYNTHESIS OF SCLAREOL Giles X

18 7/22/59 TITRATION STUDIES OF ALKyL AND PHENYL 3,5-DINITROBENZOATES AND Robinson,~,Ir .
PHENOLIC ESTERS WITH TMABUTYLAt4i0NIUM HYDROXIDE
19 8/31/59 A COMPARISON OF THE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Bellin x

OF THE 1954 THROUGH 1958 CROPS
20 9/4/59 THE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE, PART I . urene, Young

& Greene
21 9/11/59 DETERMINATION OF CR GANIC HALIDES BY TITRATION WITH TETRA- Cundiff x

BUTYLArMONIUM HYDROXIDE
22 9/28/59 DETERMINATION OF ACTIVE HYDROGEN BY TRITIUM EXCHANGE Giles X
23 9/29/59 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE XI . a-TOCOPHEROL odgman & Cook
27 3/3/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1959 . Ditto

RESEARCH'DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 196 0 Page 1 1 //' (0,5 •
0 Dat e Autho r
1 1/7/6 0 DETERMINATION OF THE DILUTION OF MAINSTREAM S OKE BY AIR PASSING P~_' Haefel e
i ~
THROUGH A POROUS CIGARETTE PAPER `y ~ ',
L
2 2/4/6 0 SYNTHESIS OF AMBREINOLID E Bernasek
3 2/10/6 0 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XII . SQUALENES AND odgman
SOLANESENES . ook & Mims
4 2/18/6 0 SUPPLEMENT - THE USE OF IBM METHODS FOR HANDLING AND INTERPRETIN G
DATA WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE AGING OF TOBACCO
(See RDR, 1959, No . 3 - dated 3/16/59)
x
5 2/29/6 0 DETERMINATION OF SCLAREOLIDE CONTENT OF TOBACCOS BY ISOTOPE , ;Newe11
DILUTION
6 3/21/6 0 CORRELATION OF CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS AND~AGING CHANGES OF Bellin

BURLEY TOBACCO
7 3/30/6 0 A PROCESS FOR RECOVERY OF SCLAREOL FROM CLARY SAGE CONCRETE Teague,
Jame s
8 4/1/6 0 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XIII . SCLAREOLIDE $ . odgman &
FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE . Cook
Ir~ 4/11/6 0 THE RAPID DETERMINATION OF SCLAREOLIDE BY INSTRUMENT ANALYSIS Laurene, Youn .
Moser
10 4/20/6 0 THE PYROLYSIS OF AMBREINOLIDE AND THE RELATED SYNTHESIS OF AN Mims x

UNSATURATED LACTON E
11 4/21/6 0 THE OXIDATIVE NATURE OF POLYMER FORMATION IN FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Elliott ~C
12 4/22/6 0 THE DETERMINATION OF SUGARS IN TOBACCO Elliott
13 4/26/6 0 THE ABSORPTION OF OXYGEN AND THE LIBERATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE Elliot t
BY AGING TOBACCO - l~
14 4/27/60 THE DETERMINATION OF ORGANIC AND INORGANIC SULFUR IN PROCESSED Elliott

9
TOBACCO AND HYDROGEN SULFIDE IN THE SMOKE - ANALYTICAL METHODS
AND RESULTS
15 4/29/60 FLAME PHOTOMETRIC DETERMINATION OF POTASSIUM IN CURED TOBACCO Dobbinsx
~
O i
N ~
N
v
51710 5219
. • .
42
*ESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1960 Page 2
No . Date Author
16 5/12/60 V/ TURKISH TOBACCO . ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION & SYNTHESIS OF Schumac. 40

6-ACETYL-2,3,4-tris-d-B-METHYLVALERYL-B-D-GLUCOSE
17 5/9/60 +ol FLUE-CURED TOBACCO . SUMMARY REPORT 1954-1959 8owlandW
18 5/11/60 J THE PYROLYSIS OF a-ACETOXYAMBREINOLIDE Mims ~
19 5/16/60 ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS VIA THE SCHONIGER OXIDATION . I . Cundiff ~(

DETERMINATION OF ELEMENTAL SULFUR .
20 5/26/60 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XIV . POLYCYCLIC ~;~,odgman & Cook
AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
21 6/30/60 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XV . COMPARISON f~~~Rodgman, Cook &
OF DIFFERENT TOBACCO TYPES `~ Chappell
-A
22 7/1/60 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE .SMOKE CONDENSATE . XVI . NORMAL ~A~Cook, Rodgman &
LONG-CHAINED PRIMARY ALCOHOLS Young
23 7/8/60 NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF ORGANIC HYDROXYL GROUPS Robinson x

Z{7z*
7/27/60 / THE DETERMINATION OF FIVE-CARBON AND SIX-CARBON ACIDS BY Latimer & :ikl 'ser
& GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY
25 7/27/60 ATTEMPTED SYNTHESIS OF DEHYDROAMBREINOLIDE Bernasek ~" .

,.
/--//- ` ~l
ESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1960 Page 3
st o . Date Author
A PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF THE HIGHER FATTY ACIDS IN

FLUE-CURED, BURLEY,
~.. : ; AND TURKISH TOBACCOS
.; .
CHANGES IN FATTY ACID COMPOSITION DURING GERMINATION,
GROWTH, AND,,CURING OF HICKS VARIETY TOBACCO PLANTS
ORGANIC ACIDS IN AGING FLUE-CURED AND BURLEY TOBACCOS WITH

SPECIAL REFERENCE TO CITRIC, MALIC AND OXALIC ACIDS
PROCESS FOR PRODUCING SCLAREOLIDE FROM SCLARF.OL . PART II . Bernasek X

CHRCMIC ACID OXIDATION OF MIXTURES OF METHYL KETONE,
CYCLIC OXIDE AND SCLAREOLIC ACID
30 9/1/60 A RAPID DETERMINATION OF MANOYL OXIDE AND 13-EPIMANOYL OXIDE Laurene &,fi~Younl
r -;~
IN ISOMER MIXTURES
31 9/6/60 DETERMINATION OF ALKOXYL GROUPS
32 9/19/60 41 DEHYDRATION OF SCLAREOL . I . THE EPIMERIC MANOYL OXIDES
33 10/20/60 A METHOD FOR SYNTHESIS OF SCLARAL : LABORATORY EQUIPMENT
4 10/20/60 /BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . I'. ISOLATION PROCEDURES,

0 PREVIOUSLY KNOWN COMPOUNDS AND DITERPENIC GLYCOLS
35 11/8/60 SYNTHESIS OF DIHYDROSCLAREOLIC OXIDE Bernasek & Henl
36 • 12/2/60 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XVII . THE EFFECT

OF ALUMINA-SUPPORTED .CATALYSTS ON TOTAL POLYCYCLIC HYDRO- Rodgman~ ook
CARBONS, TOTAL SOLIDS AND NICOTINE
37 12/6/60 ISOTOPIC FATE STUDIES WITH TO~CCO CONSTITUENTS . I . THE Haefele & Gilee
FATE OF n -H ENTRIACONTANE - 16 - C DURING SMOKIN ~G
38 12/7/60 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XVIII . CHLORANIL :411odgman & Cook
, AND 2,4,7-TRINITROFLUORENONE AS FILTER TIP ADDITIVES
39 12/7/60 TURKISH TOBACCO . ISOLATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF Giles &3*umac

12a-HYDROXY-13-EPIMANOYL OXIDE
40 12/16/60 /TURKISH SAND . PROGRESS REPORT ON THE ISOLATION OF SOME 0 , Schumache

ITS CONSTITUENTS IE ~ iG
41 12/19/60 ~
SMOKING QUALITY OF BURLEY STRIPS DENICOTINIZED BY F ON Squires~Y
3/3/66 DITTO 3RD QUARTER - 1960 Ditto
DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1960 Ditto

~ 3/3/66
51710 5221
, 7.112W • pdo-*~. ete'u°
RESEARCH DEPAR2MENT REPORTS - RDR - 1961 //, /H 4- {O,3
. ..
No :' y Date •Title
1/6/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XIX . THE DETERMINA-

0 TION OF POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
2 1/9/61 V THE DISTRIBUTION OF PHENOL BETWEEN DIETHYL ETHER AND AQUEOUS Laurene 6
SOLUTION . Lewallen
3 1/12/61v( IMPROVED PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF ACIDS IN TOBACCO Sensabaug

SMOKE .
Alh
4 1/13/61 V/ DETERMINATION OF COUMARIN IN TOBACCO AND TURKISH DUST BY ISOTOPE ' ~~[ewell
DILUTION .
1/26/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XX . A NOTE ON THE Rodgman d

NORMAL LONG-CHAINED PRIMARY ALCOHOLS : AN ADDENDUM TO m Cook
RDR, 1960, No . 22
6 1/27/61 /PHOSPHORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDRO- df Walker

CARBONS
7 2/3/61 EFFECT OF OZONE ON BURLEY TOBACCO Giles

'~ps ,'(k4j(o -
8 2/6/61 ,HIGHER FATTY ACIDS IN THE SMOKE CONDENSATE OF BURLEY & FLUE-CURED
I/ TOBACCOS . A FACTORIAL DESIGN EXPERIMENT SHOWING THE EFFECT OF Bellin,!
VARIATION•OF CIGARETTE MOISTURE, WEIGHT & TOBACCO TYPE
•
10
2/14/61
2/23/61
GROSS SEPARATION AND DETERMINATION OF THE PHENOLIC FRACTION FROM
TOBACCO SMOKE CONDENSATES
THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXI . PHENOLS

Cundiff
,~Rodgman +
• ~' Cook
11 2/23/61 /THE PYROLYTIC FORMATION OF POLYNUCLEAR AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS . I . ~° ~ Mims

EXPLORATORY STUDY
12 3/3/61 V/TURKISH TOBACCO . ISOLATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF DEHY9R0-

AMBREINOLIDE AND THE ISOLATION OF COMPOUNDS XVI AND XVII ~~~ Schumachei
13 3/22/61 OXIDATION OF MANOYL OXIDE . I . SYNTHESIS OF SCLAREOLIDE ~CGi1es
14 3/27/61 SAMPLING PROGRAM FOR THE AGING PROJECT ~ Shiffert
15 3/27/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXII . THE COMPOSITION Rodgman,
OF AN.'ALIPHATIC ESTER FRACTION FROM TOBACCO AND TOBACCO SMOKE . ® Cook, Belli
Mims, Young
51710 5222 J
J ,.
,0), .,_. ,cl.f...4,s 0..
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1961 ~
0 114- -2
io . Date Author(s)
16 3/30/61 QJALITATIVE STUDY OF THE MICROBIOLOGY OF STORED CIGARETTE Long, Margaret~

TOBACC 0 / `
17 4/4/61 PROCESS FOR PRODUCING SCLAREOLIDE FROM SCLAREOL : LABORATORY Mays, Hen1x &
DEVELOPMENT : SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT Wilson
18 4/11/61 ION EXCHANGE CHROMATOGRAPHY OF AMINO ACIDS IN TOBACCO ~James, W . B .
19 4/24/61 ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS VIA THE SCHONIGER OXIDATION . III . if Robinson X

DETERMINATION OF ELEMENTAL CARBON
20 4/25/61 POLYPHENOLS OF TOBACCO . II . DETERMINATION OF CHRLOROGENIC ftystrom

ACID, RUTIN, AND SCOPOLETIN IN CIGARETTE BLEND TOBACCO
FRACTIONS
21 4/28/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXII . AND 4L ~~~k & Rodgman
LEVANTENOLIDE FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE
~a
22 -'' ~~/9/G1 THE-D4ygRMIN&,iON-0$_P1iENOL" XSIGAREtTE SMO QN~~~NSAT
l ,tl~%, G ~
23 5/11/61 TOBACCO FERMENTATIONS : DENICOTINIZATION OF BURL~LEAT' . *uires & Hayes
~ 5/15/61 THE INVESTIGATION OF NONAQUEOUS TITRIMEfiRIC SYSTEMS USING Sensabaugh

TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM HYDROXIDE X
• 25 5/16/61 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THE "COCONUT-OIL" 02thumacher
FRACTION IDENTIFICATION AND SYNTHESIS OF MARIOLIDE ~
(COMPOUND XIII)
26 5/16/61 FREE AMINO ACIDS IN AGING TOBACCO ~ James
27 5/17/61 POLYPHENOLS OF TOBACCO . I . THE QUANTITATIVE DETERMINATION j W ystrom

OF CHLOROGENIC ACID, RUTIN, AND SCOPOLETIN IN TOBACCO AND
TOBACCO PRODUCTS
28 5/23/61 BIOCONTROL OF LASIODERMA SERRICORNE BY BACILLUS PULVIFACIENS Long, Margar X

29 5/31/61 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF THE VOLATILE ESSENTIAL
OILS OF TOBACCO . I . PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF BURLEY La timer®
TOBACCO
30 5/31/61 FLUE-CURED TOBACCO : SUMMARY REPORT 1959-1961 Rowlandal
51710 5223
No . Date ' Author(s)
31 6/12/61 NICOTINE RECOVERY FROM DILUTE AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS BY

DISTILLATION OF NICOTINE AZEOTROPES AT PRESSURES ABOVE
ONE ATMOSPHERE • ,
Neal
x
32 6/28/61 ATTEMPTED NOMAQUEOUS TITRATION OF DDVP (0,0-Dimethyl-2,2- Robinson ~
dichlorovinyl Phosphate) IN PYRIDINE AND ETHYLENEDLAMINE
WITH TETRABUTYLAt4tONIUM HYDROXIDE
33 6/28/61 THE DDMERIC PEROXIDE OF SCLAREOL OXIDE AND ITS DECOMPOSI-

TION PRODUCTS
34 7/6/61 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . IL . CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO oberts

DITERPENOIDS, - AND -1,3-DUVENDIOL, AS CYCLOTETRADECYL
GLYCOLS
35 7/14/61 DETERMINATION OF FATTY ACIDS IN TOBACCO - QUANTITATIVE Bellin ~'

R
STUDIES OF'THE PROCEDURES USED FOR SEPARATING THE FATTY
ACIDS AFTER SAPONIFYING HEXANE EXTRACTS OF TOBACCO
7/17/61 THE QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION OF CARBOHYDRATES IN AGING Shiffert'~

9 TOBACCO / `
37 7/25/61 V/ THE DETERMINATION OF PHENOL IN CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE Latimer ~
38 7/25/61 J THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MASS SPECTROMETIC ANALYSIS OF PHENOLSrurene & Young

IN TOBACCO SMOKE
r
39 8/1/61 POLYPHENOLS OF TOBACCO . III . FACTORS INFLUENCING THE __ 6hifz"

CHLOROGENIC ACID, RUTIN, AND SCOPOLETIN CONTENT OF FLUE-
CURED TOBACCO
40 8/3/61 NICOTINE,FERMENTATIONS, PROCESS FOR THE CONVERSION OF Squires & Hes

TO 3-SUCCINOYLPYRIDONE-6 BY DEEP-CULTURE BACTERIAL FERMENTA-
TION
41 8/3/61 STABILIZATION OF THE HEOPFNER REACTION WITH ALUMINUM IONS ; Nystrom

REACTION OF ALUMINUM NITRITE WITH ORTHO-DIHYDROBENZENES
42 8/18/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXIV . 6-ACETYL-

2,304-TRIS-d-B-METHYLVALERYL-B-D-GLUCOPYRANOSIDE FROM TURKISH 'ftbdgman & Cook
TOBACCO SMOKE Ln
~
~3 8/21/61 TURKISH TOBACCO CHARACTERIZATION OF i~-LEVANTANOLIDE Giles to •.a
i ~
4 9/22/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE, 70CV . 12q- ok & Rodgman
HYDROXY-13-EPIMANOYL OXIDE•FRCM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE .
3010/20/61 EVALUATION OF MALEIC HYDRAZIDE (MH-3Q) TREATED BURLEY Shiffert

TOBACCO Harrell-Latim
•• Pz,~. Sc6 _ .r'8'
REJEARClH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1961 ~C s
No . ~ Date Author(s)
11/7/61 'FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS IN PREPARATION AND UTILIZATION OF Cundiffx

QUARTERNARY AMMONIUM HYDROXIDE. TITRANTS l'
i1/7/61 INVESTIGATION OF MEANS FOR DETERMINATION OF THE ACETYL GROUP Cundiff (`
11/9/61 TOBACCO FLORA : •QUANTITATIVE STUDIES • Squire~,&

.. Haye 1(s
11/14/61 EXPERIMENTAL GROWTH OF CLARY SAGE IN FORSYTH COUNTY, N . .C ., Henley, Te e

FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SCLAREOL Allen, Liv
50 11/15/61 THE PYROLYSIS OF MIXTURES OF HEXANE AND ETHANOL-1-C14 aefele-Mims

~ Latimer
51 11/15/61 RDR, 1961, NO . 31 . TITLED "NICOTINE RECOVERY FROM DILUTE Neel ~

AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS BY DISTILLATION OF NICOTINE AZEOTROPES A l`T
PRESSURES ABOVE ONE ATMOSPHERE"- SUPPLEMENT TO
52 11/16/61 OXIDATION OF MANOYL OXIDE . II . A STUDY OF OXIDANTS OTHER THAN •Giles x

PERMANGANATE IN THE SYNTHESIS OF SCLAREOLIDS
53 11/17/61 . REVISION OF THE OPTICAL METHOD FOR THE DETERMI&TION OF SCLAREOL Laurene-v
Moser 6f N
Drummong
11/27/61 THE ANALYSIS OF CONTAMINANTS ON CAPACITOR FOIL Laurene-LyerNv &

Lamb
12/4/61 ISOLATION OF SOLANESOL FROM FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Rowland-Le.fAmer•

G es
12/6/61 VAPOR-PHASE REMOVAL OF NICOTINE FROM TOBACCO Ashburn &~"'
57 12/11/61 BURLEY TOBACCO CONSTITUENTS . I . SURVEY OF SEPARATION AND Rohd

ISOLATION PROCEDURES OF THE METHANOL EXTRACTABLES
58 12/27/61 VAPOR PHASE REMOVAL OF NICOTINE FROM BURLEY TOBACCO IN Weel

PILOT PLANT AND PLANT-SCALE COMMERCIAL EQUUPMENT .
62 3/4/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1961 Ditto

1
.
.• RESEARCtI DEPARTMENT REPORT - RDR - 1962
S Date
1/10/62
Author(s)
NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF INORGANIC PERCHLORATES WITH TETRA- ~ Sensabaugh

BUTYLAM4IONIUM HYDROXIDE
2 1/10/62 EVALUATION OF THE MODEL 29 COLEMAN NITROGEN ANALYZER ~ Robinson
3 1/12/62 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE MOLECULAR DISTILLATION OF TURKISH AfA Schumacher

TOBACCO EXTRACT . THE ISOLATION OF TWO TOBACCO FLAVORANT
PRECURSORS (SCLAREOL OXIDE AND COMPOUND XXIII)
4 1/15/62 CORRELATIONS OF MASS SPECTRA OF BIOYCLIC AND TRICYCLIC ' Laurene b~(
DITERPENES WITH THEIR MOLECULAR STRUCTURE ~~S •° Young
5 1/29/62 IDENTIFICATION OF C15 AND C17 SATURATED FATTY ACIDS, AND C15, Bellin ~
C16, C17, UNSATURATED FATTY ACIDS IN TOBACCO AND IN SMOKE
2/15/62 DEHYDRATION OF SCLAREOL . III . THE SCLARENES AND RELATED ENOL F~~ Mims
LACTONES .
7 2/19/62 ANALYSIS OF SCLAREOL BY ISOTOPE DILUTION . II . USE OF SCLAREOL "~,ZNewe11

C-14
3/5/62 AN ATTEMPTED SYNTHESIS OF SCLAREOLIDE FROM CATIVO GUM ~~Giles

.~
• 3/12/62
VOID
THE DETERMINATION OF CARBAMATES BY HYDROLYSIS WITH PERCHLORIC

s
: k,, Sullivan
ACID
11 4/19/62 COLORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF SCLAREOLIDE AND RESOLUTION OF r Cundiff

. ,.
SCLAREOLIDE-ACETOXY ACID MIXTURES
12 5/1/62 CHARACTERIZATION OF M-II-b, AN UNSATURATED GLYCOL ISOLATED ,Rowland

FROM FLUE-CURED TOBACCOS, AS 12-ISOPROPYL-1,5,9-TRIMETHYL-
3,8,13-CYCLOTETRADECATRIENE-1,5-DIOL
13 5/8/62 EFFECT OF AGII~G ON THE SCLAREOLIDE CONTENT OF TURKISH TOBACCOS Newe11A
THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXVI . HETEROCYCLIC ~< i dgman &
14 6/21/62 04
Krq ook
NITROGEN COMPOUNDS FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE . .
15 6/21/62 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXVII . PHENOLS FROM4~odgman &
TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE : EUGENOL AND ISOEUGENOL ook
~ KNN
•
: .~ . RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT - RDR - 1962
Date TITLE Author(s)
6/21/62 FLUE-CURED TOBACCO . VOLATILE COMPONENTS, 1962 '~°~" Rowland &

Giles
17 6/25/62 CARBOHYDRATES IN COMPETITIVE BRANDS OF CIGARETTES Shiffert
18 6/25/62 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE ISOLATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE Alk Schumacher &
ESSENTIAL OIL OF TURKISH TOBACCO DUST Vestal
19 6/27/62 PREPARATION AND NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF THE p-NITROPHENYL- Robinson &

HYDRAZONES OF ALDEHYDES, KETONES, AND CARBOHYDRATES r Sensabaugh
20 6/28/62 FATTY ACIDS OF TOBACCO LEAVES . FRACTIONATION AND SAPONIFICATION &',,Bellin ~

OF THE HEXANE EXTRACT OF TOBACCO
21 6/29/62 THE DEGRADATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF PALMITIC ACID-C1400H , .--\Be11in

P
DURING AIR CURING DETACHED BURLEY LEAVES
22 7/5/62 OCCURRENCE OF SCLAREOL IN BURLEY TOBACCO-C14 "• •;f Newell-Haefel

~~+ Latimer
23 7/6/62 FLUE CURED TOBACCO . THE K-I AND K-II COMPOUNDS Rowland &
Cabiness
24 7/10/62 EXTRACTION OF SCLAREOL-C14 FROM CLARY SAGE-C14 AND ITS Newell A,
CONVERSION TO SCLAREOLIDE-C14
~ 7/12/62 CONDENSATION OF ALDEHYDES WITH ISOPHORONE q-4-Rowland &

t' `'~Cabiness
26 7/19/62 ELUTION COLUMN PREPARATION OF TOBACCO FOR FLAME PHOTOMETRIC .~4~y"Dobbins

CALCIUM DETERMINATION
27 7/19/62 THE QUALITATIVE EVALUATION OF TOTAL ALKALOIDS, NICOTINE, TOTAL ,~F~,,,Shiffert

NITROGEN, POTASSIUM, CHLORIDE AND pH (SLURRY) IN AGING TOBACCO ~
28 7/31/62 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE CHARACTERIZATION OF BOVOLIDE Schumacher

(COMPOUND XXXI) r
29 8/1/62 CHARACTERIZATION OF M-II-f AS A-3,8,13-DUVATRIENE-1,5-DIOL `4Roberts &

Rowland
30 8/7/62 G-7 TYPE PLUG WRAPPER FOR CHEWING TOBACCO ~~yMoser

t.n
N
J
r
m
• C"
C
r
~
N
p
v
r
N
.RESEARCN DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1962
. .
No . Date
~ 1962
8/13 NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF HYDRAZIDES WITH TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM Sens abau'il
HYDROXIDE Robinson`
32 8/16 COLORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF SCLAREOL Cundiff ~~
33 8/21 SUBSTITUTED MALIC ACIDS AS TOBACCO FLAVORANTS Fredrickson
34 9/10 TOBACCO PRODUCT FROM THE SMOKABLE COMPONENTS OF BURLEY STEMS Ashburn 40
35 9/27 SYNTHESIS OF (-)-6-ALKOXYNICOTINES AND THEIR TARTRATE SALTS Bernasek ì.,
36 10/10 MA`CROCYCLTC .`:DITERRENES, a- AND 5-4,8,13-DUVATRIENE-1,3-DIOLS Roberts 0

• FROM TOBACCO
37 11/2 THE~~.FATE`l OF,jTH,E_:;,FLAVORANTS OF TOBACCO DURING SMOKING . I .
SCLAREOLIDE
38 11/2 THE PREPARATION OF MARIOLIDE FROM S-IONONE
39 11/6 SHREDDING STEMS WITH A DISC REFINER FOR USE AS CIGARETTE CUT
FILLER:
40• . 11/15 SCLAREOL FROM CLARY SAGE - AVOCA FARM, .1962
41 12/11 I'SOLATION OF LONG-CHAINED ALIPHATIC ESTERS OF S-AMYRIN FROM
TURKISH AND BURLEY TOBACCOS
42 '12/17 EXTRACTION OF NICOTINE FROM BURLEY TOBACCO Ashburn %
43 12/28 .T4i,, : STUDY. .pF BURLEY SMOKE CONDENSATE . I . PRELIMINARY SURVEY Fredrickson ~
OF THE ODOROUS CONSTITUENTS OF BURLEY SMOKE CONDENSATE
I a
/ - 'f " e 7"
44 ~ :3/4/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - RESEARCH REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1962 Penick .& .Ford
. ; . m
45 ; ;3/7/66 DITTO 2ND QUARTER - 1962 . }
go r
46 : 3/4/66 DITTO 3RD QUARTER - 1962 , :.
m
47 3 `3/4/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1962
~
48 ! :5/17/66 PENICK & FORD DEVELOPMENT-REPORT, 3RD QUARTER - 1962 Penick :& iFord
49 :5/17/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - 1962

Penick & :Ford
50 ~ 5/16/66 PENICK,& FORD DEVELOPMENT REPORTS - JULY 1961-MAY 1962
;
Ln
F"
_j
~
m
Ln
N
N
co
,
RDR, 1963, Nos . 1-61 DESTROYED, exaept as noted .
RESEARCli DEPARTMENT REPORT - RDR - 1963
Date TITLE
a 1/8/63 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXVIII . POSSIBLE

a PRECURSORS IN TOBACCO OF PHENOLS IN TOBACCO SMOKE
2 1/14/63 THE STUDY OF BURLEY SMOKE CONDENSATE . II . THE ISOLATION OF Fredrickson

DISUBSTITUTED MALEIC ANHYDRIDES FROM STRONG ACID FRACTION
3 1/21/63 DEHYDRATION OF SCLAREOL . IV . MISCELLANEOUS COMPOUNDS DERIVED Mims

©
FROM SCLAREOL
4 1/24/63 NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF INORGANIC SALTS FOLLOWING REACTION,WITH Robinson

8-HYDROXYQUINOLINE
5 1/30/63 FRACTIONATION OF EXTRACTS OF TURKISH BLEND TOBACCO Fredrickson
6 1/31/63 THE FATE OF FLAVORANTS DURING SMOKING . II . CO UMARIN Newell' . ..
7 2/1/63 DETERMINATION OF CONSTITUENTS OF TOBACCO BY ISOTOPE DILUTION . Newell,

III . PHENYLACETIC ACID
8 2/6/63 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF THE VOLATILE ESSENTIAL OILS OF (l~'. Latimer-Moser
TOBACCO . V . INVESTIGATION OF 1960 BURLEY TOBACCOS .BEFOREiAGING
AND AT THE END OF ONE YEAR OF AGING
9 2/6/63 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXIX . PHYTOL ,~I Rod ma~ n-Cook
(3,7,11,15-TETRAMETHYL-2-HEXADECEN-1-OL)
• 2/7/63 DETERMINATION OF TOBACCO HUMECTANTS BY VAPOR CHROMATOGRAPHY
`
~$R
(t j~
.. .
_
ne-Laurene- \ ,
Cliag-an) '
~ ~ .~ .
12 2/8/63 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXX . VOLATILE Fredrickson-

ALDEHYDIC AND KETONIC CONSTITUENTS "7Chappell-Rodgmai
11 2/8~/63 EFFECT OF TOBACCO TREATMENTS ON POLYNUCLEAR HYDROCARBONS IN ~Ashburn

CIGARETTE SMOKE
13 2/15/63 SCHARDINGER CYCLODEXTRINS Sinfert cn

~
~
14 2/15/63 ANALYTICAL EVALUATION OF LICORICE . I . COLORIMETRIC DETERMINATION Cundif f x r
m
OF GLYCYRRHIZIC ACID . II . DETERMINATION OF REDUCING, NON-REDUCING
AND TOTAL SUGAR CONTENT
CHARACTERIZATION OF M-II-e AND COMPOUND X . MACROCYCLIC DITER- cm owland

PENES ISOLATED FROM TOBACCO
THE LOSS OF SCLAREOL DURING HEAT DRYING OF CLARY SAGE FLOWERING ' Hhefele
,
PARTS
THE RECOVERY OF SCLAREOL FROM CLARY SAGE FLOWERING PqTS BY A Haefele,~o

DIRECT EVAPORATION CONDENSATION PROCESS
9- z8-t ~F
THE INSECTICIDAL ACTIVITY OF NICOTINE DERIVATIVES AND RELATED
• ,COMPOUNDS AGAINST THE GREEN PEACH APHID
3/13/63 SYNTHESIS OF (-)1-ALKYL- AND (-)-[p-(,h1~k1)phenoxyethoxyethyl]-

5-(N-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl)-2-pyridones
20 3/1YI63 CULTIVATION OF BACILLUS MACERANS FOR PRODUCTION OF AMYLASE Long, Marga`

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT - RDR - 1963
Date TITLE Author

0
3/15/63 AN INVESTIGATION OF SOME POSSIBLE METHODS OF ISOLATING TOBACCO
s CONSTITUENTS
22 3/19/63 INVESTIGATION INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF DETERMINING ACTIVE HYDROGENXobinson

UTILIZING GRIGNARD REAGENTS AND NONAQUEOUS TITRIMETIC TECHNIQUES
23 3/25/63 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . III . STUDIES ON CONDENSATE FROM ~

DENICOTINIZATION PROCESS
24 3/25/63 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXXI . -1,5-Dimethyl ; r odgroan-Cook

12-Isopropyl-9-Methylene-5,8-Oxido-3,13-Cyclotetradecadien-1-0L
and -12-Isopropyl-5,8-Oxide-1,5,9-Trimethyl-3,9,13-Cyclotetra-
decatrien-l-ol from Turkish Tobacco
25 3/25/63 COLUMN ELUTION OF HUMECTANTS FROM TOBACCO AND DETERMINATION BY MCundiff-Greene

VAPOR CHROMATOGRAPHY
26 4/4/63 ISOLATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF COMPOUND XI . A MACROCYCLIC ~ Roberts-

DITERPENE ISOLATED FROM TOBACCO Schumacher
27 4/5/63 NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIC COMPOUNDS WITH ASensabaugh

TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM HYDROXIDE
"' 4/9/63 SYNTHESIS OF FATTY ACID CARRIERS X Mays
"' 4/10/63 FLUE-CURED TOBACCO VOLATILE

1963COMPONENTS,
•Rowland-Cabine
~
30 V 0 I D V 0 I D
31 4/16/63 THE EXTRACTION OF BURLEY TOBACCO redrickson Ln

J
N
m
32 4/17/63 THE FATE OF FLAVORANTS OF TOBACCO DURING SMOKING . III . ~ Newe11
RRNg PHENYLACETIC ACID Ln
N
W
33 4/29/63 INTERFERENCES IN FLAME PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF TOBACCO SAMPLE X Dobbins m
ELUATES FOR POTASSIUM AND CALCIUM
34 4/29/63 ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY OF DERIVATIVES OF (-)6-HYDROXYNICOTINE . IIIxong, Margaret
35 5/8/63 ANALYTIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXXII . ISOPRENOID ALCOHOLSW

.'dgman-Cook
36 5/13/63 ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION & SYNTHESIS OF COMPOUND XXVI . WSRoberts_JNS
37 5/14/63 PILOT PLANT STUDY OF PROCESS FOR CONVERTING SCLAREOL TO SCLAREOLIDE Henley et a1V10
38 5/15/63 BY-PRODUCTS FROM OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL . I . NEUTRAL BY-PRODUCTS
39 5/15/63 GROWING TOBACCO IN A GREENHOUSE . I . GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS, CURING

& CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF BURLEY & FLUE-CURED VARIETIES
-p
~ 5/23/63 IMPROVING THE SMOKING QUALITY OF BURLEY STEMS Jackson,~~ ~
` ~tr i
41 5/24/63 BURLEY STEM TREATMENTS Ashburn ,y
42 5/28/63 FIVE- AND SIX-CARBON ACID CONTENT OF TURKISH TOBACCOS atimer-Moser

' Page 3
RDR - RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT - 1963
• Date
6/5/63
TITLE ~'~"Author"I
GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF VOLATILE ESSENTIAL OILS OF TOBACCO . Latimer

VII . EVALUATION OF GREEN LEAF SAMPLES OF 1961 & 1962 BURLEY CROPS
44 6/6/63 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . IV . ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION, AND qgRoberts

SYNTHESIS OF COMPOUND BV-20
45 6/7/63 EFFECT OF PLANT GROWTH REGULATOR (2 CHLOROETHYL) TRIMETHYL- Bellin ~

AMMONIUM CHLORIDE ON HEXANE EXTRACTABLES OF CURLEY BURLEY LEAVES
46 6/7/63 BY-PRODUCTS FROM OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL . II . OXIDATION OF BY-PRODUCTSY\ Giles
47 6/21/63 DEVELOPMENT OF METHODS FOR DETERMINATION OF TOBACCO HUMECTANTS IN eene6undiff

CIGARETTE SMOKE Waureneo
48 7/8/63 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE QISOLATION OF ACID CARRIERS FROM TURKISH ~Schumacher
TOBACCOS
49 7/18/63 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . V . ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION, AND ~ Roberts

SYNTHESIS OF COMPOUND BV-21
50 8/22/63 'EVALUATION OF LABORATORY FUNCTIONS AT AVOCA FARM DURING PLANT CAdiff-Robinson-

START-UP, 1963 VanHoy
;,L 9/3/63 SYNTHESIS OF DEHYDROIONONE ~ Rowland
9/6/63 THE F1TE OF FLAVORANTS OF TOBACCO DURING SMOKING . IV . (A) MENTHOLvewell-Latime
53 9/27/63 RAPID METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF FIVE- AND SIX-CARBON ACID CONTENT~~iystrom-
OF SUGAR ESTERS AND SUGAR ESTER FRACTIONS ISOLATED FROM TOBACCO . Sizemore
UTILIZATION OF ALCOHOLYSIS REACTION FOR PREPARATION OF ETHYL ESTERS
FOR GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
54 9/30/63 SYNTHESES OF DIMETHYLMALEIC ANHYDRIDE BY CATALYTIC, VAPOR PHASE,~'~,,~ Mims cnN

AIR OXIDATIONS ~
~
~
55 10/3/63 DIRECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FLUE-CURED TOBACCO QUALITY AND TOTAL ~ Nystrom
Ln
0-DIHYDROXYBENZENE (POLYPHENOL) VALUE DETERMINED BY STABILIZED '' N
w
HAEPFNER REACTION ~
56 10/8/63 ISOLATION OF A TOXIC FRACTION FROM BACILLUS PULVIFACIENS Jackson

x
57 11/12/63 GROWTH & PREPARATION OF BACILLUS PULVIFACIENS CELLS TOXIC TO © Long, Margare
LASIODERMA SERRICORNE LARVAE
58 11/13/63 FACTORS WHICH AFFECT PHENOL CONTENT OF CIGARETTE SMOKE urene-Young-Lyerlv

r • • • . ...-. - -- M
59 11/20/63 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . VI . ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION ~ Roberts ~

AND SYNTHESIS OF 2-ACETYL-5-METHYLPYRROLE ~
N
~ 12/9/63 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . VII . ISOLATION, IDENTZFICATION?11D ~ Roberts J

SYNTHESIS OF 2_•ACETYLPYRAZINE 0
61 12/11/63 NICOTINE FERMENTATIONS : CHARACTERIZATION OF CULTURE .B43-3 AS ~( Squires-Hayes

PSEUDOMONAS NICOTINOLYTICUS, N .S .P .
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1963 f Page 4
No . Date Title Author(s)

1963
66 3/7/66 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1 63 Penick & Ford
69 3/7/66 DITTO 4TH QUARTER - /1963 Ditto

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT - RDR - 1964
.. Date TITLE
1/6/64 BURLEY TOBACCO CONSTITUENTS . VIII . ISOLATION, CHARACTERIZATION AN

SYNTHESIS OF TWO PYRROLE CARBOXALDEHYDES
2 1/8/64 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL . III . NEUTRAL BY-PRODUCTS ',_ Giles
3 1/8/64 ~~Mays-Henley
RECOVERY OF SCLAREOL FROM CLARY SAGE CONCRETE THROUGH THE USE OF `~~`
SURFACE-ACTIVE AGENTS
4 1/9/64 THE FATE OF FLAVORANTS OF TOBACCO DURING SMOKING . IV . (B) MENTHO• ewell'=LatimE
CONTENT OF MAINSTREAM VERSUS NUMBER OF PUFFS Moser
5 1/9/64 THE STUDY OF BURLEY SMOKE CONDENSATE . III . CONSTITUENTS 0 THE •Fredrickson}
STRONG ACID FRACTION .. .~
6 1/10/64 GROWING TOBACCO IN A GREENHOUSE . PART II . A COMPARISON OF GENERAL Bellin

ELECTRIC POWERGROOVE LAMPS AND SYLVANIA GRO-LUX LAMPS FOR
ILLUMINATING CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT GROWTH CHAMBERS a .'~-e-o /11 . S•
7 1/17/64 PILOT PLANT PROCESSING OF CLARY SAGE CONCRETE FOR SCLAREOL Henley X
8 2/3/64 4S,YNTHESIS OF FATTY ACID CARRIERS` Bernasek ~'
9 2/11/64 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . IX . FURTHER ISOLATION AND SYNTHESIS Woberts

OF 2-ACETYLPYRAZINE AND RELATED COMPOUNDS .
~ 2/12/64 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXXV . A SUMMARY OF }ri V~~ Rodgman
AN EIGHT-YEAR STUDY
11 4/12/64 DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSTRUMENTAL METHOD FOR THE DETERMINATION OF ~ Laurene-Greer

A TRIACETIN IN FILTER PLUGS
12 2/14/64 THE USE OF DRI-DIE 67 SILICA FOR PROTECTING STORED TOBACCO FROM Bellin ~s
DAMAGE BY THE CIGARETTE BEETLE
13 3/13/64 PREPARATION AND NONAQUEOUS TITRATION OF THE DIPHENYL-ACETYL- Sensabaugl~

1,3-INDANDIONE-I-AZINES OF ALDEHYD$S AND KETONES
14 3/17/64 AN EVALUATUON OF BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY . I . HERBICIDAL ACTION OF Bellin ~ .

NICOTINE~'DERIVATIVES AND RELATED COMPOUNDS AS DETERMINED BY
TESTS WITH LEMNA MINOR (DUCKWEED)
15 3/17/64 AN EVALUATION OF BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY . II . THE TOXICITY OF Bellin

NICOTINE'"AND~•ITS DERIVATIVES+TO MINNOWS ..
~
16 3/20/64 ISOLATION OF C14-LABELED NICOTINE FROM C14-LABELED BURLEY TOBACCO Nys tro~~' N
BY A PROCEDURE RELATIVELY NON-DESTRUCTIVE TO OTHER CONSTITUENTS Sizempre~v
r
17 3/27/64 POLONIUM-210 IN TOBACCO . I . EVIDENCE THAT A MAJOR PORTION NYSTROM-~
ORIGINATES FROM ATMOSPHERIC CONTAMINATION OF TOBACCO PLANTS Bellin
~~~
4/1/ 6 4 THE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE . PART II . Laurene-Greene-Drunmo
i 4/8/64 DEHYDRATION OF SCLAREOL . V . THE DEHYDRATION OF SCLAREOLIC ACID Mims
20 4/16/64 START-UP AND OPERATION OF AVOCA PROCESSING PLANT Teag e Z et al

'
~7; 'l
.
51710 5233
.
~ge 2
~
Date Author(s)
4/16/64 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT : THE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE AM'Laurene-Lyer7

SMOKE . PART II . Greene-Harbir
22 4/22/64 DETERMINATION OF HYDROGEN CYANIDE IN CIGARETTE SMOKE ®rbin-Lyerly-Yot
23 4/30/64 THE FATE F DISODIUM ISOPROPYLMALONATE-3-C14 DURING SMOKING ® Haefele
24 5/5/64 AGRONOMIC RESEARCH ON CLARY SAGE AT AVOCA FARM, BERTIE COUNTY, f~ Collins-
N . C ., IN 1963 a-?.-Q /s'! • S . ~ • S'ta}lings-Ma11oi
" .•
25 5/6/64 PREPARATION OF 4-(2-BUTENYLIDENE)-3,5,5-TRIMETHYL-2-CYCLOHEXEN_ ~ Bluhm
1-ONE (THE K-1 AND K-Z COMPOUNDS) p•," M• S .
26 5/6/64 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL IV . OXIDATION ON ~~~"''~~~ ~ Giles

ACIDIC BY-PRODUCTS
14
27 5/6/64 ~ SYNTHESIS OF 2,3-DIMETRYLMALEIC ANHYDRIDE r4,~~ Shackelforc
28 se.c,, Du2
~
.~[ •
29 5/11/64 THE SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DETERMINATION OF HYDROGEN CYANIDE IN : ;~ : : Cundiff

CIGARETTE SMOKE d-~ m' S•
5/11/64 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL V . OXIDATION OF J Giles

COMPOUND B4G1
6
5/14/64 SYNTHESIS OF DEHYDROIONONE . II . r ;Rowland o
EXPERIMENTAL GROWTH OF CLARY SGAE IN FORSYTH COUNTRY, N . C . FOR ~~ N

32
THE PRODUCTION OF SCLAREOL . SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT . r
J
~
33 6/3/64 GROWING TOBACCO IN A GREENHOUSE . III . A COMPARISON OF FLUE-CURED Be l l in'~:: ò
F 4
AND BURLEY VARIETIES OF TOBACCO GROWN BY NUTRICULTURE METHODS IN
A GREENHOUSE AND OUTSIDE
34 6/5/64 NONAQUEOUS CONDUCTIMETRIC TITRATIONS USING TETRABUTYLAMMONIUM Sensabaugh

HYDROXIDE
35 6/17/64 LABORATORY SYNTHESIS FOR BOVOLIDE AND DIHYDROBOVOLIDE . ~, Davis, T .C .

(ALSO TWO-PAGE ADDENDUM TO THIS REPORT) `
36 7/13/64 DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION OF DENICOTINIZING PLANT AT SHED 131, ~ Neel, R .M .

WHITAKER PARK - OCTOBER, 1962 - FEBRUARY 1964 . ~'
37 8/12/64 SYNTHESIS OF SAFRANAL AND SM36C X Rowland-Roberts
38 9/2/64 THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DIRECT VAPOR CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION Laurene-

OF ACETYLALDEHYDE,ACROLEIN, AND ACETONE IN CIGARETTE SMOKE . yerly-Young
VOID VOID
6 9/3/64 THE SYNTHESIS OF SUGAR ESTERS J Davis T .C .
41 9/8/64 MEASUREMENT OF ARREST OF RADIANT HEAT BY REFLECTIVE MATERIALS `'p,~ Laurene

~,,
51710 5234
M Date
9/9/64 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE INVESTIGATION OF THE STEAM CONDENSATE 4D;chumacher

Author(s)
43 . 9/16/64 SYNTHESIS OF N,N DIALKYL-N'-BENZYL-N'-[5-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)- BernasekX

2-PYRIDYLJ-ETHYLENEDIAMINES
44 9/24/64 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL . VI . NEUTRAL BY-PRODUCTS Giles X
45 9/29/64 BURLEY TOBACCO CONSTITUENTS . II . SURVEY OF SEPARATION AND ISOLATIONI~de

OF THE CHLOROFORM EXTRACTABLES
46 10/2/64 ACIDIC CONSTITUENTS OF BURLEY VOLATILES I . ISOLATION, CHARACTERI- ohde

ZATION AND SYNTHESIS OF COMPOUND S015C
47 10'/.2/64 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . XI . ISOLATION AND SYNTHESIS OF TOBACCO MWoberts

CONSTITUENTS
48 10/6/64 ACID CONSTITUENTS OF BURLEY VOLATILES . II . ISOLATION AND SYNTHESIS (1:1eRohde

OF S017C
10/7/64 THE FATE OF RADIOACTIVE LINOLENIC AND PAIMITIC ACIDS DURING THE Bellin
AIR-CURING OF BURLEY TOBACCO
10/28/64 POLONIUM-210 IN TOBACCO . III . FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT A MAJOR PORTION Bellin- ~
ORIGINATES FROM ATMOSPHERIC CONTAMINATION OF TOBACCO PLANTS Nystrom-Sizemc
51 11/4/64
11/4/64 EFFECT OF NICOTINE DERIVATIVES AND RELATED COMPOUNDS ON PLANT James",!-
GROWTH ~ ~
11/6/64 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE OXIDATION OF SCLAREOL . VII . ACID BY-PRODUCTS Giles%,4
12/4/64 SYNTHESIS OF DEHYDROIONONE . III . Rowland)~
12/28/64 AN EVALUATION OF BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY . III . HERBICIDAL ACTION OF Bellin ~.+~

NICOTINE DERIVATIVES AS DETERMINED BY ROOT IMMERSION TESTS WITH
SOYBEAN AND CORN SEEDLINGS
55 12/28/64 LABORATORY OPERATION AT AVOCA FARM - 1964 Robinson-Cundi~`~~

Vanl~'oy ,
56 12/28/64 INTERIM REPORT NO . 1 TO R . J . REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY - STUDY ~ 1 ; Industrial

OF THE CILIARY-DEPRESSANT ACTIVITY OF CIGARETTE SMOKE `' Bio-Test, I
57 12/28/64 INTERIM REPORT NO . 2 TO R . J . REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY - STUDY a Industrial

OF THE CILIARY-DEPRESSANT ACTIVITY OF CIGARETTE SMOKE w Bio-Test Labs
t"0
r
~
N
~
.4
N
51710 5235 0
.
. i

S
1964
62 3/7 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 1ST QUARTER, 19 4 Penick & Ford
63 3/7 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 2ND QUARTER, 19 4 Penick & Ford
64 3/7 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 3RD QUARTER, 1P64 Penick & Ford
65 3/7 PENICK & FORD, LTD . - DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 4TH QUARTER, 1P64 Panick & Ford
p
.~. ~
~
/.Z-e. _4
Date Title 'Author(s)
1/4/65 DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION OF DENICOTINIZING PLANT AT BLDG . 60~XNeel, R . M .

WHITAKER PARK, FEBRUARY .1964 - SEPTEMBER 1964
2 1/13/65 DE AiT-OE .ANAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC METHOD TO DETERMINE /, rly-Young-

ARBON MONOXIBE I CIGARETTE SMOKE ~( urene
3 1/18/65 PROCESS FOR INCREASING THE VOLUME OF TOBACCO ' aredrickson
4 1/18/65 EFFECT OF CULTURAL PRACTICES ON QUALITY, YIELD AND SOME Ne as

CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS OF THE 1963 BURLEY CROP
5 1/21/65 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . XII . SYNTHESIS ANb CHARACTERIZATIONORoberts

RELATED TO SM2C
6 1/28/65 DETERMINATION OF OXIDES OF NITROGEN IN TOBACCO SMOKE asens ab augh
7 VOID
8 2/4/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 3 TO R .J .R . - STUDY OF THE CILIARY_ ~ INDUSTRIAL BIO-

DEPRESSANT ACTIVITY OF CIGARETTE SMOKE TEST LABS ., INC :
9 2/9/65 . BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . XIII . ATTEMPTED SYNTHESIS OF SM400wj" . Roberts
10 2/22/65 REPORT NO . IITRI-C8036-4 - DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS v"' .0~,IITRI Res . Inst .
2126/65 VARIATION OF ARTHROBACTER OXYDANS, a2 Squires-Hayes

0
LL 2/26/65 BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . XIV . ATTEMPTED SYNTHESES OF ISO- g2 ;Roberts, tJ1
PHORENE-RELATED COMPOUNDS ~
~
~
13 3/15/65 DETERMBNATION OF FORMALDEHYDE IN THE GAS PHASE OF CIG . SMOKE WCundiff-VanHoy m
Ln
N
14 3/24/65 THE HYDRATION OF NITRILES TO AMIDES USING MANGANESE DIOXIDE . I . .,.~aefele w
PRELIMINARY REPORT . SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS ~
15 3/24/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 4 TO R .J .R . - STUDY OF THE EFFECT OF a Industrial Bio-

CIGARETTE SMOKE ON CILIARY ACTIVITY Test Lab ., Inc .
16 3/24/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 5 TO R.J .R . - EXPERIMENTAL WORK ON THE ~ Industrial Bio-

eZ EFFECTS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE ON CILIARY ACTIVITY Test Labs ., Inc .
17 3/25/65 INVESTIGATION OF AN IMITATION PEACH BRANDY FLAVOR Schumacher
18 4/1/65 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF THE WATER IN CIGARETTE Thome

MAINSTREAM SMOKE AND TOTAL PARTICULATE MATTER (TPM)
19 4/14/65 BY-PRODUCTS FROM THE 01 OATION OF SCLAREOL . . .VIII . IMPURITIES V,.Gi1es

IN THE AVOCA PRODUCT ~
20 2/9/65 THE SYNTHESIS OF LACTONES ISOLATED FROM TURKISH TOBACCO STEAM Vestal
• 5/4/65
CONDENSATE y~44
BURLEY TOBACCO COMPONENTS . XV . AUTOXIDATION OF a-IONONE AND t~~ Roberts

DERIVATIVES
22 5/5/65 MASS SPECTROMETRIC ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE . PART I : Young-Drummond

DETERMINATIONOF METHYL CHLORIDE AND CARBONYL SULFIDE '
i'
A
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1965 ~Page 2
0 5/5/65 DIRECT VAPOR CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF MENTHOL, PROPYLENE ~~?=

GLYCOL, NICOTINE, AND TRIACETIN IN CIGARETTE SMOKE M!p
24 5/6/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 6 TO R .J .R . _ 90-DAY SUBACUTE VAPOR INHALATION Industrial Bio

TOXICITY OF SR6C (~ Test Labs ., Inc
25 5/6/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 7 TO R .J .R . - 90-DAY SUBACUTE INHALATION Industrial Bio-

TOXICITY OF THE PYROLYTIC PRODUCTS OF:,`SR6C Rk Test Lab .,Inc
26 5/19 FLAVORED CARBON AS AN ADDITIVE FOR TOBACCO PRODUCTS Vflarwood & Teague
27 5/20/65 SOLVENTS IN THE OONVERSION PLANT AT AVOCA FARM Ashburn ~,~
28 6/1/65 DETMN . OF EXPERIMENTAL NEMATOCIDE UC 21149 IN FLUE-CURED Johnson

TOBACCO AND CIGARETTE SMOKE
29 6/14/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 8 TO R .J .R . - STUDY OF THE CILIARY- REM Industrial Bio-

DEPRESSANT ACTIVITY OF CIGARETTE SMOKE m Test Labs ., Inc .
30 6/21/65 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE XXXVI . PHYTONE

(HEXAHYDROFARNESYL ACETONE) AND SOLANONE (2 METHYL-5-ISOPROPYL-
1,3-NONADIEN-8-ONE)FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE
-kt 7/9/65 TURKISH TOBACCO . THE INVESTIGATION OF THE STEAM CONDENSATE,

PART II .
0
7/12/65 DEVELOPMENT OF METHODS OF PIPE SMOKE ANALYSIS : PROGRESS REPORT
33 7/14/65 INVESTIGATION OF IMITATION "SHERRY"
34 7/26/65 AN EVALUATION OF BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY . VI . GREENHOUSE TESTS OF

CHEMICALS FOR THEIR HERBICIDAL PROPERTIES
35 8/6/65 GROWING TOBACCO IN A GREENHOUSE . PART IV . EXPERIMENTS WITH

LIQUID CULTURE
36 8/18/65 SUBACUTE TOXICITY STUDIES OF SCLAREOLIDE IN RATS AND MONKEYS
37 8/18/65 THE ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXXVII . A PHYTYL odgman-gak cook
ESTER FRACTION FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE
38 8/23/65 REACTION PRODUCTS OF PHENYLACETONITRILE WITH ACTIVATED

MANGANESE DIOXIDE
Bluhm X
®
39 9/7/65 AN INVESTIGATION OF NITROGEN OXIDES AND METHYL NITRITE IN ~r~q~~
.~, .-
TOBACCO SMOKE
r,o Laurene-Drum .
4 9/13/65 THE DEVELOPMENT OF A METHOD TO DETERMINE THE ACTIVITY OF
CARBON IN GRANULAR OR BONDED ROD FORM a%w Whalen
;~
9/17/65 THE SYNTHESIS OF VARIOUS COMPOUNDS ISOLATED FROM THE STEAM Vestal-
CONDENSATE OF TURKISH TOBACCO
42 fJ i
~ Date Title
42 9/21/65 ;.MASS~SPECTROMETRIC ANALYSIS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE, PART II .

DETERMINATION OF ACETYLENE, ETHYLENE AND ETHANE
43
44 10/8/65 CILIAS.TATIC ASSAY Fluck-Kelly
45 10/11/65 FLU0R0ME .TRIC DETERMINATION OF POLYNUCLEAR HYDROCARBONS Stamey-Dobbins
46 11/1/65 PENICK & FORD, LTD . RESEARCH REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1963
47 11/1/65 DITTO, 2ND QUARTER - 1963
48 11/1/65 DITTO, 3RD QUARTER - 1963
49 11/1/65 DITTO, 4TH QUARTER - 1963 ,to
50 11/1/65 DITTO, 1ST QUARTER - 1964
51 11/1/65 DITTO, 2ND QUARTER - 1964

.~ 11/1/65 DITTO, 3RD QUARTER - 1964
~ 11/1/65 DITTO, 4TH QUARTER - 1964 to
54 11/1/65 DITTO, 1ST QUARTER - 1965 to
55 11/1/65 DITTO, 2ND QUARTER - 1965
56 11/4/65 INVESTIGATION OF NATURAL CARDAMOM OIL
57
58 11/9/65 PERCHLORIC ACID HYDROLYSIS OF CARBAMATES, AMIDES, NITRILES

AND IMIDES
59 12/3/65 ABSCISIN II . SYNTHESIS OF 1-HYDROXY-4-KETO-a-IONONE
60 12/8/65 PREPARATION OF SCLAREOL DERIVATIVES FOR BIOLOGICAL TESTING Gil,~-
61 12/15/65 INTERIM REPORT NO . 9 TO R .J .R . - THE SMOKING MACHINE, THE Iti ust`r al Bio-
IN VIVO STUDIES OF CILIASTATIC EFFECTS OF TOBACCO SMOKE W~est LaN's ., Inc .
~tl
62 12/20/65 FATTY ACID CARRIER ~~Fluck ~'`~
63
~ Jan-March PENICK & FORD, LTD . DEVELOPMENT REPORT, 1ST QUARTER - 1965
1965
c. .a",' .. &4..e.4..e- ~ uI'.~*~ , ,.C-~ . -~,,. .. 4 /
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1966 ~
No . Date Title 'Muthor(s)
~ 1966
1/5 INTERIM REPORT #10 TO R .J .R TOB . CO . - STUDIES ON THE CILIASTATIC _Industrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF CAMEL CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA IN VIVO ~1Test Labs .,Inc .
2 1/13 AN EVAL . OF BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY . VIII . TESTS OF CHEMICALS FOR Bellin ~ .

THEIR HERBICIDAL PROPERTIES USING EIGHT SPECIES OF PLANTS
3 2/7 THE ANALYSIS OF CIG . SMOKE CONDENSATE . XXXIV . 4-(2-BUTENYLIDENE)- odgman-Cook

ISOPHORONES FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE ~
4 2/22 INTERIM REPORT #11 TO RTR TOB . CO . - STUDIES ON CILIASTATIC ,l9h Industrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF WINSTON CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA IN VIV '~'0 Test L ab s ., Inc .
5 2/28 INVESTIGATION OF MEANS FOR AUTOMATING THE PROCEDURES FOR Cundiff-

DETERMINING THE SUGAR CONTENT OF TOBACCO X Robinson
6 3/9 PIPE SMOKE ANALYSIS : ACROLEIN, ACETALDEHYDE, ACETONE, HYDROGEN~YHarbin-Laurene

CYANIDE, OXIDES OF NITROGEN, NICOTINE AND TOTAL SOLIDS
7 3/10 BIOLOGICAL ASSAY OF RJR COMPOUNDS FOR INSECTICIDAL ACTIVITY a~~Walton

~
8 3/18 INVESTIGATION OF NUTMEG OIL ~Schumacher
I
9 3/29 PRODUCTION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF TETRONIC ACIDS FROM ~ . ~ W . B . James -
PENICILLIUM CHARLESII r~ .Y Hayes
e
~ 4/6 THE FILTRATION OF CIGARETTE SMOKE ~Mims ~
a
~
~1 4/5 EXAMINATION OF THE VAPOR PHASE OF CIG . SMOKE USING HIGH I Thome
RESOLUTION GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY WITH ELECTRON CAPTURE AND HYDROGEN ~
N
FLAME DETECTION ~
m
12 4/13 SOME FACTORS INFLUENCING THE FILTRATION OF THE VAPOR-PHASE OF 'i`; Rodgman-Cook,
CIGARETTE SMOKE
13 4/13 DETERMINATION OF ANTIOXIDANTS IN VEGETABLE .OIL & PEANUT CHIPS ~.~: D . P . Johnson
14 4/19 SYNTHETIC STUDIES RELATED TO THE SYNTHESIS OF ABSCISIN II, A , ;`~,".Heclmtan, Robert
PLANT HORMONE - -
15 4/25 pH MEASUREMENTS OF TOBACCO SMOKE
16 4/28 INTERIM REPORT #12 TO RJR TOB . CO . - STUDIES ON THE CILIASTATIC ndustrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF TEMPO CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA N VIVO est Labs .,Inc .
17 5/4 USE OF DRI-DIE SILICA DUST TO CONTROL THE CIGARETTE BEETLE IN Bellin ~
WAREHOUSES :
~. . .. ;:~,.
18 5/9 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF THE PYROLYSIS-GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY 4 ..atiiner
OF POLYMERS, TOBACCOS AND STARCH DERIVATIVES
A
5/10 THE SYNTHESIS OF SEVERAL TOBACCO CONSTITUENTS FROM S-IONONE Vestal ~~ ~QK~
0
20 5/16 THE EFFECT OF A FREEZING PERIOD BEFORE NATURAL AGING ON THE Shif fertN
QUALITY OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO a-
. RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1966
+ 1966
5/17 SYNTHETIC ROUTES TO ABSCISIN II Roberts e,
Heckman . "'R .
22 5/23 THE OXIDATIVE COUPLING OF ACTIVATED METHYLENE COMPOUNDS BY Leffingwell~

METAL OXIDES '`
23 6/21 INTERIM REPORT #13 TO RJR TOB . CO . - STUDIES ON CILIASTATIC 'dustrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF SALEM CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA IN VIVO st Labs ., Inc .
24 6/27 STUDIES OF CIG . SMOKE IRRITATION I : DEVELOPMENT OF A BIOLOGICAL••• Loe

TEST AND SOME PRELIMINARY RESULTS .. ::.
• 25 6/30 TRIACETIN CONTENT OF CIG . SMOKE AS A FUNCTION OF THE AGE OF THE leland-
FILTER rly
26 7/11 DETERMINATION OF THE BENZYL CONTENT OF BENZYLATED STARCH D . P . Johnibn

.
(rec'd 2 copies - 1 filed in starch file ; 1 destroyed) .. ,:
27 7/25 AN INVESTIGATION OF RANCIDITY AND OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING THE D . P . Johnm

.pQUALITYOFCKNGLS
28 7/25 POLYMERIC HYDRAZIDES AS SELECTIVE ABSORBENTS FOR CARBONYL CPDS .
29 7/26 INTERIM REPORT #14 TO RJR TOB .•C0 . - THE IN VIVO STUDIES OF ndustrial Bio-
~ CILIASTATIC EFFECTS OF CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TR~CHEA est Labs .,Inc .
. 7/26 INTERIM REPORT #15 TO RJR TOB . CO . - SALIVA-SOLUBLE CILIASTATIC Industrial Bio-
COMPONENTS OF TOBACCO SMOKE 4WTest Labs .,Inc .
31 8/4 STUDIES OF CIGARETTE SMOKE IRRITATION . II : ADAPTATION OF THE Moew

GRANULOMA POUCH TEST FOR VAPOR-PHASE IRRITANTS
32 8/18 THE CHEMISTRY OF CATALYTIC MANGANESE DIOXIDE Piehi X
33 9/1 SYNTHESIS OF SOME GLUCOSE MONO-ETHERS J . G . JonesA
34 9/2 INTERIM REPORT #16 TO R,JR TOB . CO . - THE EFFECTS OF SALIVA- 4 Industrial Bio-
SOLUBLE CILIASTATIC COMPONENTS OF TOBACCO SMOKE ON THE CAT Test Lab`s ., Inc .
TRACEA IN VIVO
, . . . . , . ., : ,
35 10/19 T~F~,•.SYNTHESISF . . OF FATTY ACID CARRIERS . II ; Bernasek '`
36 10/21 INTERIM REPORT #17 TO RJR TOB . C0 . - STUDIES ON CILIASTATIC ~ndustrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF LUCKY STRIKE CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA IN VIVO - est Labs ., Inc .
IBT NO . E4662 (A
0
37 10/25 SYNTHESIS OF Y-PHENYL-Y-[5-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-2-PYRIDYL]- Bernasek ~r
Id,N-DIMETHYLPROPYLAMINE N
P
38 10/26 STARCH SULFITE Giles ~
0
~ 11/14 INTERIM REPORT #18 TO RJR TOB . CO . - STUDIES ON CILIASTATIC 4 ndustrial Bio-
EFFECTS OF CHESTERFIELD NONFILTER CIG . SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA est Labs ., Inc .
IN VIVO IBT N0 . E4662
51710 5241
o. Date Title Author(s)

1966
40 12/7 COLORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF OXIMES AND UNSUBSTITUTED Delwin Johnson
HYDROXYLAMINE
41 12/21 MICROBIAL BIOSYNTHESIS OF PRECURSORS FOR SPECIFIC TOBACCO AVORZLong-Hayes

COMPOUNDS +Shiffert
. ~ .C~' ~2 l96 ~, n~o S, 3 S a.r.•e s C
° 'I
: t...L .. . .a.,

1747 v
" ., Date Title Author(s) C
I-
, v
101/9 PRELIMINARY REPORT ON EFFECTIVENESS OF VARIOUS METHODS FOR CONTROL- hP'Walton R
LING CIGARETTE BEETLE (LASIODERMA SERRICORNE) IN TOB . WHSES . :• . r
~
v.
CONVERSION OF D-GLUCOSE TO A MIXTURE OF D-GLUCOSE AND D-FRUCTOSE *Shi ~~ffer t a
USING GLUCOSE ISOMERASE
3 1/20 STARCH DERIVATIVES : DETERMINATION OF SUBSTITUTED PYRIDINIUM 1% Johnson, D . I

ALKYL HALIDE GROUPS IN MODIFIED STARCH
4 2/1 ANORECTIC AND SUBACUTE EFFECTS OF MARIOLIDE ' ..`,:'. _,~r Tompkins & Fluck
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS OF ORGANIC COATING ON FOIL ~~ Latimer

rt
DETERMINATION OF Q-39 SURFACTANT IN STARCH ,,1Johnson & Latimer
~~ ; .
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF SMOKE Weinstein & Sue Stevensc
SYN THESIS OF (-)-6-ALKYLTHIONICOTINES
9 3/17 DERIVATIVES OF 2,5-FURANDICARBOXALDEHYDE
.10 3/30 INTERIM REPORT #19 - STUDIES OF CILIASTATIC EFFECTS OF TEMPO

CIGARETTE SMOKE ON CAT TRACHEA IN VIVO - IBT NO . E-4662
CHEM . RESEARCH ON FLAVORANTS ~ PART I . CONSTITUENTS OF MAPLE SYRUP ;!~tohde

~,, .. .
INVESTIGATION OF STYRAX OIL ~~'~Ves
:~;, . tal
TOTAL SYNTHESIS OF (-)-MENTHOL Shackelfof Leffingwell
14 4/6 IDENTIFICATION OF HOMOLOGOUS SERIES OF a,$-DIKETONES AND a-KETOALDEHYDES PThome

IN CIG . SMOKE BY GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY WITH ELECTRON CAPTURE DETECTION
15 5/3 MASS SPECTROMETRIC ANALYSIS OF CIG . SMOKE, PART III . DETERMINATION OF ",oung, G . W .
ACETALDEHYDE, PROPANE, PROPYLENE AND ACETONITRILE
16 5/24 COMPARISON OF ANALEPTICS I MOUSE EXPERIMENTS Crosby Tompkins
17 6/6 NEW SYNTHETIC METHOD FOR PREPARATION OF AROMATIC ALDEHYDES, tt-Aeffingwell & Bluha
KETONES-- AND- SCHIFF-- BASES-- -- - - - --- ----- --- -- -- --- -
18 6/6 CHARACTERIZATION OF A COMMERCIAL SYNTHETIC FLAVORANT Schumacher

6. A
19 6/13 STARCH LEVULINATES ~, Calley Eaton
20 6/28 ABSCISIN II RELATED COMPOUNDS Rob~~~ ts & B . Hege
21 7/25 APPLICATIONS OF THERMAL ANALYSIS TO CARBOHYDRATES, TOBACCO AND Pi'~"Pieh1, D . H .

CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS ,
, . . . . .• , . . . .. ,: . : ..r f: .
8/8 GAS- CHROMATOGRAPHIC METHOD TO DETERMINE COUMARIN IN CIG . SMOKE Wyerly & Gi1lBlan
8/9 INORGANIC DERIVATIVES OF STARCH I . FORMATION, NATURE & APPLICATIONS °~ Pieh1, D . H ;
24 8/17 FAS'CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF PHENOL IN CIGARETTE SMOKE Lyerly & Gillelan
51710 5243
I
Page 2
1967
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1967 OIL
0 Date Title Author(s)
L5 8/18 STARCH DERIVATIVES . DETERMINATION OF ALLYL AND METHALLYL x Johnson, D . l

GROUPS IN MODIFIED STARCH
26 8/23 AN IMPROVED SYNTHESIS OF MARIOLIDE AND RELATED PRODUCTS x Schumacher, J .N .
27 8/31 POTENTIAL PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS RELATED TO ABSCISIN II K He ckman , R . .
28 8/31 SURFACE AREAS OF•VARIOUS FILTER rows K Harbin, B . A
29 9/5 THE CHEMISTRY OF TETRAMETHYLSUCCINALDEHYDE • 1 Rice, Wm . Y .
30 9/19 SYNTHESIS OF HERBICIDAL PYRIDINE AND PIPERIDINE COMPOUNDS ~ Moates, R . F .
31 10/2 A STUDY OF THE CALOROGENICITY OF PAF-2006 ~ Fluck
32 10/2 ANALYSIS OF CIG . SMOKE CONDENSATE . XLV . BRANCH-CHAINED ACIDS ~;took & Rodgman
FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE .
v
c
33 10/13 THE CHEMISTRY OF 2-METHYL-2-(2-METHYLPROPENOXY)-PROPIONALDEHYDE x Rice, W . Y . ~
N
34 10/23 PRODUCTION OF A THERMOSTABLE BACTERIAL a-AMYLASE x Lartigue r
J
~ 10/20 CHARACTERIZATION OF CORIANDER OIL AND FURYLONE Schumacher So
36 10/23/ FJLTRATION EFFICIENCY OF VARIOUS FILTERS : PART I , MONODISPERSE AEROSOL tS

.fWeinstein
,
37 10/19 GROSS EFFECTS OF SYNTHETIC PLANT HORMONE, ABSCISIN II, ON PLANTS AND ABehlin
EFFECTIVENSSS OF RELATED COMPOUNDS FOR FLOWER ABSCISSION & ROOTING
38 10/24 BIOSYNTHESIS OF AMYLOGLUCOSIDASE BY A STRAIN OF THE MOLD ASPERGILLUS <Hayes &

• AWAMORI Lartigue
39 10/30 ANALYSIS OF CIG . SMOKE CONDENSATE . XLVI . GERANYL ACETONE AND ,.4k~ Cook & Rodgma
FARNESYL ACETONE FROM TURKISH TOBACCO SMOKE W- ;
40 11/22 STARCH DERIVATIVES . DETMN . OF RATIO OF TERTIARY AND QUATERNARY x Johnson, D . P

PYRIDINIUM GROUPS IN MODIFIED STARCH
41 11/29 STARCH DERIVATIVES . DETMN . OF HYDRO GROUP CONTENT OF MODIFIED STARCHxjohnson, D . P
42 12/6NICOTINE FERMENTATIONS, PROCESS FOR THE BIOSYNTHESIS OF (1)-6- A Squires &

HYDROXYNICOTINE BY FERMENTATION WITH ARTHROBACTER OXYDANS, a2, Hayes
VARIANT NO . 8
43 12/12 DETERMINATION OF NITRATE IN TOBACCO
44 12/14 INVESTIGATION OF AN IMITATION CHOCOLATE FLAVOR
• 12/26 SORPTION ISOTHERMS AND PORE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS OF SOME FLAVOR

RELEASE .CARBONS ,
46 12/27 STARCH DERIVATIVES . A STUDY OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSTITUENTS

IN MODIFIED STARCH
51710 5244
~~..~ . . „
m,N t.. . ~ n/d . .C.0 O~ e<~- ~L.~t~,~i~i
Page 1
/~ '9" • 7~ l~ .
a.~ ..~ .~
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1968 02 `
„"' Date Title Author(s)

1968
1 1/2 TETRAMETHYLSUCCINALDEHYDE AS A STARCH INSOLUBILIZING AGENT Kirby, K . W .K
2 1/3 SOLVENT-STEAM TREATMENT OF STARCH Kirby, K . W . l(
3 1/5 HYDROPHOBIC STARCH DERIVATIVES Kirby, K . W . l`
4 1/9 NEW METHODS FOR PREPARATION OF CARBALKOXYMETHYLENETRIPHENYL- Roberts, D . L, )<

PHOSPHORANES
5 1/23 OXIDATIVE COUPLING REACTIONS IN ORGANIC CHEMISTRY . II . OXIDATION

OF KETONES, ALDEHYDES AND SCHIFF BASES WITH LEAD DIOXIDE
Leffingwell X
6 1/25 BLENDS OF BENZYL STARCH WITH PLASTICIZERS AND EXTENDERS Kirby, K . W . X
7 1/30 HYDROPHILIC STARCH DERIVATIVES Kirby, K . W .YN

0
..
8 2/1 RAPID ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL COMPONENT(S) OF CIGARETTE SMOKE ;raves, Harry N
9 2/5 HALOGENATION AND HALOHYDRINATION OF STARCH DERIVATIVES CONTAINING Kirby, K . W .x Q

UNSATURATED GROUPS ~ ~o
10 2/14 SYNTHESES OF SOME POTENTIAL CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM STIMULANTS Heckman, R. A .x
10 2/14 INVESTIGATION OF DAVANA OIL Schumacher Bw
12 2/27 CYCLIC SULFITES AND THIONYL CHLORIDE DERIVATIVES Roberts-Hege (a'bni
13 3/4 THE CATALYTIC FORMATION OF OLEFINS FROM CARBONYL COMPOUNDS Piehl x

USING A PULSED MICROCATALYTIC REACTOR
14 3/18 COMPARISON OF ANALEPTICS II GUINEA PIG EXPERIMENT Tompkins, Cex sby
15 3/19 THE EFFECT OF REACTION PARAMETERS ON THE PYROLYSIS OF Piehl y

1-HYDROXYNEOCAR9-^%.iENTHYL ACETATE
16 4/2 EXPLORATORY STUDIES OF OXIDATION REACTIONS Rowland ~<
17 5/3 CATIONIC STARCHES BASED ON VINYLPYRIDINE . I . QUATERNARY Giles, Neuman411-

CATIONIC DERIVATIVES Jones (J . Glenwoo
18 5/9 THE 1,4-DIPOLAR BICYCLOADDITIONS OF N,N'-DIALKYL-2,2,3,3- Young, Harve?Y\

TETRAMETHYLSUCCINALDIMINES TO ISOCYANATES & ISOTHIOCYANATES
19 5/13 PREPARATION OF COMPOUNDS FOR BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION McKenzie, J . .A
20
~ 5/20 DEVELOPMENT OF A METABOLIC SCREEN
A .- 5/27 THE EFFICIENCY OF VARIOUS FILTERS TO MONODISPERSE AEROSOLS `
23 5/29 RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTAL CIGARETTE BEETLE CONTROL PROGRAMS FOR 1967
51710 5245
I /A
It
~
, RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1968
Date Title Author s

'0 1968
24 6/6 THE CHEMICAL AND MECHANICAL MODIFICATION OF STARCH X Piehl-Whisnant
25 6/21 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF X-CELOSE ; TOTAL SUGAR (PAF-2011) ~( Piehl-'r/hisnant•et al
26 6/25 NICOTINE FERMENTATIONS, PROCESS FOR THE BIOSYNTHESIS OF X Squires-Hayes

3-SUCCINOYLPYRIDINE BY FERMENTATION WITH CULTURE B43-3
27 6/26 A STUDY OF THE CALOROGENICITY OF SEVERAL HYDROXYPROPYLATED ~ Fluck, E . R .

STARCH DERIVATIVES .
i " ;, . . .
' ,
28 7/11 A STUDY OF THE TOXICITY OF ACETYLPYRAZINE "~+ ." . %VF1uck & Doyle Johnso
29 7/23 FATE OF SMOKE CONSTITUENTS IN ANIMALS . I . COMPARISON OF METHOD VColucci-Sizemore

OF ADMINISTRATION ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF C-14 FROM PHENOL-C-14
PALMITIC ACID-C-14 , AND NICOTINIC ACID-C-14 IN THE RAT
30 7/23 THE OXIDATIVE COUPLING OF IMINES Bluhm ,.
31 7/25 PREPARATION OF SUBSTITUTED PYRROLIDINES Bluhm
32 8/1 STARCH DERIVATIVES : THE DETMN . OF HYDROXYETHYL GROUP x Johnson-D .P . &

CONCENTRATIONS IN MODIFIED STARCH '\Musselwhite
S 9/13 ENZYMATIC CONVERSION OF D-GLUCOSE TO D-FRUCTOSE : ISOLATION &

IDENTIFICATION OF AN ACTIVE NEW BACTERIAL SPECIES
f' Long, Margaret
34 9/25 CONVERSION OF D-GLUCOSE TO D-FRUCTOSE BY ARTHROBACTER RJR 2453-2 X Pheil, C . G .
35 9/23 3-PYRAZOLIDINONES AND RELATED HYDRAZINO ACID HYDRAZIDES X Roberts & Hege (Bonit
36 10/18 TERTIARY PYRIDYLMETHYL STARCHES . X Neumann-Bernasek
37 10/23 XYLOSE PRODUCTION FROM CORN HULLS AND SUGAR CANE BAGASSE ^ Rix-Eaton-J . G . Jone
38 11/6 CATALYTIC HYDRATION OF 3-P-MENTHENE TO (-)-MENTHOL x Piehl
39 10/30 -A TOTAL SYNTHESIS OF (-)-MENTHOL . II XI Shackelford-Leffingwell
40 11/21 RECOVERY OF NICOTINE FROM GREEN TOBACCO p,~Shackelford-Hudson, R .B

~
41 11/26 THE USE OF NICKEL CYANIDE-AMMONIA COMPLEXES IN THE Piehl
SELECTIVE FIL"TRATION OF TOBACCO SMOKE OL
42 12/10 A SELECTIVE SINGLET OXYGEN REACTION, II < Roberts
43 12/11 SUTRO POLYOLS AS PLASTICIZERS K Pratt, George W .
44 12/19 COLORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF PERCENT CARBOXYL IN Rush-Sensabaugh-

CARBOXYMETHYL CELLULOSE usse1white
~ ,.0
ts.
~
N
r
J
51710 5246 «.
.. . I
Date Title Author(s)

a
1969
1 1/3 STUDY OF SMOKE GENERATION, TRANSPORT AND FILTRATION IN i James Harris
TOBACCO ROD
2 1/23 BIOSYNTHESIS OF GLUCOSE ISOMERASE BY A STRAIN OF ARTHROBACTER ~ L . E . Hayes
3 1/27 A GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF FREE FORMIC AND ACETIC ~ Lyerly & Goodale
ACIDS IN CIGARETTE SMOKE
4 2/19 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SPRAY CRYSTALLIZED SUCROSE, COMMERCIAL X Piehl

SUCROSE AND AMEROSE
e;, ) d-
5 2/24 EXPOSURE OF RABBITS TO WHOLE SMOKE Johnson & Fluck
6 2/26 A SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE REGARDING CARBON MONOXIDE, WITH ~ J ~ Reynolds ~~

SPECIAL REFERENCE TO ITS OCCURRENCE IN CIGARETTE SMOKE AND
REMOVAL FROM SMOKES AND GASES
7 2/28 GAS-CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF THE OXYGEN PERMEABILITY A Latimer & Clapp

OF FILMS AND FILM COMBINATIONS
8 3/6 THE IDENTIFICATION OF ACIDS FORMED DURING GLUCOSE-TO-FRUCTOSE X Clapp

INVERSION
,Pik
INITIAL ATTEMPTS AT EXPOSING RABBITS TO WHOLE CIGARETTE SMOKE Doyle Johnson
• 10 4/10 SORPTION OF PHOSPHINE BY TOBACCO, RESIDUES, AND FATE OF RESIDUESABellin & C . Walton
ON SMOKING AS DETERMINED BY MASS SPECTROMETRY AND RADIOACTIVE
ISOTOPE STUDIES
11 4/14 DEVELOPMENT OF MUTANT OF ARTHROBACTER PRODUCING GLUCOSE ISOMERASFY\ Chin Lee

WHICH IS CONSTITUTIVE AND INSENSITIVE TO CATABOLITE REPRESSION
12 4/15 OXIDATIONS OF a-IONONE 2('R . Heckman
13 4/18 CONTROL OF MICROFLORA OF FACTORY AIR CONDITIONING WATER - K Squires & Hay.es
14 4/29 QUATERNARY 1-ALKYLPYRIDYLMETHYL STARCHES ~ Neumann, Giles &
Bernasek
15 5/2 NICOTINE FERMENTATIONS . BIOSYNTHESIS OF COMPOUND 350 BY ` l Squires & Hayes

FERMENTATION OF NICOTINE WITH ARTHROBACTER OXYDANS, a2, VARIANT #5
16 5/13 SYNTHESIS OF SUBSTITUTED PHENYLPYRROLIDINES K .. Wendelboe
17
`\
~;*e N
• 6/11 THE HYDRATION OF NITRILES TO AMIDES USING MANGANESE DIOXIDE
-~r v1f1'40`'4~j W
. II . Hay
%`'?
h i`~i~~„r' w
r
~ 0.
%j
20 51710 5247 ni
(/ 7o
~ Date Item Author(s)

1969
._ 6/23 INTERIM REPORT NO . 20 TO R .J .R . TOBACCO CO . - RESULTS OF Industrial Bio-Test
PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF SR13C AND SR1A, IBT NO . E-5052
22 6/23 INTERIM REPORT NO . 21 TO RJR TOBACCO CO . - RESULTS OF LC50 Industrial Bio-Test

DETERMINATION OF SR13C, IBT
. ; NO . T6667
23
24
25 7/11 SYNTHETIC TROPANE ALKALOID ANALOGS K Moates
26 7/22 THIRTY-DAY ACUTE TOXICITY STUDY OF GLUCOSE - RJR 2453-F Fluck, Ridlon, et a
27 8/6 TOTAL SACCHARIFICATION PROJECT : EFFECT OF SACCHARIFICATION x Lartigue & Ayers

CONDITIONS ON ACTIVITY OF GLUCOAMYLASE PREPARATIONS
28 8/20 PRODUCTION AND USE OF MALTOSE-FORMING AMYLASE FROM BACILLUS ~ Lartigue & Hayes
POLYMYXA
29 8/26 ENZYMATIC ISOMERIZATION OF D-GLUCOSE BY ARTHROBACTER CELLS ~ Lartigue
~ 8/19 THE ALUMINA CATALYZED AIR OXIDATION OF 4-KETO-a-IONONE ~ Rice
31 9/16 SYNTHESIS AND REACTIONS OF 1,2,3-OXATHIAZOLIDINE-2-OXIDES `~ Heckman

AND 1, 2, 3-TETRAHYDROOXATHIAZINE-2-OXIDES -- . __~,~-_ ...---~
32 9/19 THE INVESTIGATION OF THE CIGARETTE SMOKE FROM'CELANESE ~ Green, Vestal &
SMOKING MATERIAL Schumacher . .
3333 9/29 AMIDOXIME STARCH Il T . Edwards & C . Rix
34 10/23 KINETICS OF OXIDATION OF ALUMINUM FOIL DURING HOMOGENIZATION )( Piehl
35 11/3 AZOMETHINE IMIDES AND RELATED PYRAZOLIDINONES AND PYRAZOLINONESK B . Hege
36 11/10 USE OF HOT GAS JETS FOR SIMULTANEOUSLY PUNCHING 16 HOLES IN [\ Harris, Stowe &
PLASTIC FILM
37 11/20 INSOLUBILIZATION OF BENZYL STARCH ASH ~ Rix & Pratt
38 11/20 BENZYL STARCH PRODUCTION USING CONTROLLED pH t~ Pratt & Rix
39
40 12/9 NINETY-DAY FEEDING EXPERIMENT WITH PENSWEET K Fluck, Ridlon et al
~ 12/16 SOLID-LIQUID CHELATION OF METALS BY AMIDOXIME CORN STARCH ~ Piehl a
42 12/19 METABOLIC SCREEN ~[ Pluck ~

lll~~\ ro .
~ F
v
o
51710 5248 4/ !
R ESEARCH DEPART MENT REPORTS - RDR - 1970
'"'
s Date Title Author(s)
1970
r 1 1/9 SMOKING EXPOSURE STUDIES d0 V / N Pluck, E. R.
AOL
2 1/14 THIRTY-DAY TOXICITY STUDY OF SRR4A ~9) /z •Fluck, Ridlon et a
3 1/22 PREVENTION OF SED MENT AND SUSPENSION FORMATION IN PURE x Dickerson, James
MAPLE SYRUP ' (14J /,3 ' `
r 4 1/26 AN ATTEMPT TO ESTABLISH A SIMPLE PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION Tompkins &

OF A DRUG' S ADDICTING PROPERTIES ~O'r ~,Thornloe
6 1/30 SUGAR CONTENT OF FLUE-CURED TOBACCO AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO

TOBACCO AND SMOKE COMPOSITION
7 2/2 DETERMINATION OF TOBACCO FLAVORANTS PIPERONAL, ETHYL VANILLIN Martin, John &
& VANILLIN BY GAS-LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY AND FLUORIMETRIC Thacker, Aubrey
)4
THIN-LAYER CHROMATOGRAPHY (,t,6 /
8 2/3 RECOVERY OF NICOTINE FROM TOBACCO ~ZZ, /2 x Hudson & Shackelfo~

/`~
2/9 LABORATORY PREPARATION OF BENZYL STARCH (/ L ~/6~ x Rix, Bruce & Edwar(
`! /
2/10 SELECTIVE FILTRATION OF HCN IN TOBACCO SMOKE BY METAL -A)IID~O~X~MF~Piehl, Don
STARCH COMPLEXES (iLL
.ikn.
11 2/19 PILOT PLANT STUDIES OF THE PREPARATION OF BENZYL STARCH ~8v) 2 0~ruce, Sellers~,•et
12 2/24 PURIFICATION OF DEXTROSE SYRUP BY PREFERENTIAL ADSORPTION ON Nelson, Nancyrx U

A GRANULAR CARBON COLUMN (/z ) ~ S- 0
.•
13 3/5 THE STRUCTURE OF NORMAL, DEHYDRATED AND REHYDRATED TOTAL SUGAR iehl & Woodsx\ nr
USING SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPIC AND X-RAY DIFFRACTION ~ . r
` TECHNIQUES J
14 3/16 REMOVAL OF BENZYL ALCOHOL FROM BENZYL STARCH EFFLUENTS ~3r ) 2 0 Carey, et al
/ 15 3/19 DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SCREENING PROCEDURE WHICH DETECTS AND Tompkins, E . C .~(
DIFFERENTIATES MAJOR AND MINOR TRANQUILIZING AND SEDATIVE- f
HYPNOTIC ACTIVITY I~f ®7" !IJ )91 L0_
16 3/20 ELECTROSTATIC SEPARATION OF PROTEIN FROM STARCH IN CORN FLOUR(0 Mazeika, W . A . eX
17 3/23 THE EFFECT OF VARYING JET DEFLECTION ANGLE ON THE EFFICIENCY Harllee, Floria x
OF MULTIJET TYPE FILTERS &,t) l7
18 4/3 INVESTIGATION OF GLUE FAILURE IN THE C-1 FILTER, II : THE I~ Reynolds, J . H . 1w

~ ROLE OF FILTER TEMPERATURE (f S r
~ . 4/17 FLUOROMETRIC DETERMINATION 0 SELENIUM ]1N CIGARETTE PAPER AND (Vacker & Stamey
TOBACC O
51710 5249
Date Title Author s

1970 ~/Z
20 4/22 THE REACTION OF SUCCINALDIMINES WITH AMIDES AND SULFONAMIDES Young, Harvey ~(
21 4/22 CHROMATOGRAPHIC SEPARATION OF FRUCTOSE AND GLUCOSE ON CATION Lloyd, Robert/ -~C
EXCHANGE RESIN (¢7) /j
22 4/28 AUTOMATED METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF NICOTINE ALKALOIDS IN Diffee, John~

TOBACCO, USING CYANOGEN BROMIDE (7,S 1 /3
23
24 5/22 DETERMINATION OF HUMECTANTS IN TOBACCO P4) /7 %les & Gilleland
,/25 5/25 NINETY-DAY TOXICITY STUDY ON GLUCOSE-FRUCTOSE SYRUPS

. .. Ridlon'& Heise~
26 6/4 SOME 1,3-DIPOLAR CYCLOADDITIONS OF STABLE AZOMETHINE IMIDES Rice, William ~

(-I' /'d
27
28
~~~•
6/18 THE ALKALI TRANSFORMATION OF GLUCOSE TO FRUCTOSE (/7 Bruce, Robert ; r,`,,
0 .
30 6/18 DETERMINATION OF CARBOXYL CONTENT OF CARBOXYCELLULOSE (lf) /A/ Sensabaugh, Ricey&
Musselwhite N
31 6/24 PREPARATION OF DISUBSTITUTED CYCLOOCTANONES ellt l /2 Ezzell, Bobby (11
32 6/29 THE ISOLATION OF FRUCTOSE FROM INVERT SYRUP BY THE HARA PROCESS Lloyd, R . & Br~e,l
33 6/30 REACTIONS OF SCHIFF BASES )/2 Roberts, D . x
W` _
35
36
37 5/22 REPORT TO RJR TOBACCO CO . : NINETY-DAY SUBACUTE ORAL TOXICITY OF~~dustrial Bio-
GLUCOSE-FRUCTOSE MIXTURE IN BEAGLE DOGS - IBT NO . C7809 (S1) (; Test Labs, Inc .
38 7/31 A SURVEY OF LITERATURE REGARDING HYDROGEN CYANIDE, ITS OCCURRENCE Andrews, Mary 011
IN & REMOVAL FROM CIGARETTE SMOKE & REMOVAL FROM INDUSTRIAL WASTE (14> /qL
39 8/17 NONAQUEOUS TITRIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF CARBONYL CONTENT USING Sensabaugh & ®

p-TOLUENESULFONYLHYDRAZINE C/q1 13 Musselwhite o,
0
r
0. 9/2 ISOLATION OF ESSENTIAL OILS -FROM/ FLUE-CURED TOBACCO dwards, et al (n
N
r
4D v
a
~
51710 5250
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 197 0
Date TLtle Author(s )

0
197 0 (1 10
42 9/ 9 SYNTHESIS OF A 2,8-DIAZA-BICYCLO-[3 .2 .1]-OCTAN-3-ONE RING StEM X Harvey Youn g
43 9/1 6 1-(3-PYRIDYL)METHYLENE-3-OXOPYRAZOLIDINIUM INNER SALTS . A~ EW_ x Rice, Wm . Y .

CLASS OF DIURETICS (9 ) /~3 r o~! 11 a
44 10/1 3 THE USE OF Cu(II)-AMIDOXIME STARCH FOR THE REMOVAL OF HP FROM Andrews, Mary4 p
CIGARETTE SMOKE f /7J
L /:
45 10/2 3 DETERMINATION OF AMMONIA IN TOBACCO SMOKE (3jr) /7 Rush, K. et a l
46 10/2 9 PRODUCTION OF PENSWEET ON DEAE-CELLULOSE BOUND ENZYME 'COLUMNS : xMays, Charles

11,
PILOT STUDY // (, ) /
47 11/1 3 SYNTHESIS OF 4-( 2J-OXOETHYLIDENYL)-3,5,5-TRIMETHYL-2-CYCLOHEXEN=~-,,,Rice, W . Y . x

1-ONE (SM29C) ( 71 l 3
48 12/ 4 THE SUTTON RESEARCH CORP : SMOKING MATERIAL S r "`'~ 3 ~odgman + 1 1 am

Y s•. . .i •t ; R• t~ ,•'d.~t..y+, ...e: ~ .. .~ 1 : i / f e . .~ •
49
50 12/3 A RAPID GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS FOR FLUORANTHENE AND / Stowe, Mary & Pr;
PYRENE FOUND IN CIGARETTE SMOKE (4 1 / S 4 Harris, James
No . Date Title '~ ` Author(s)
,
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORTS - RDR - 1971 (24)WPage 1 of 1
1/6 CATION-EXCHANGE COLUMN CHROMATOGRAPHY OF DEXTROSE FROM THE Dickerson, JameA

ENZYMATIC HYDROLYSIS OF STARCH
1/11 AROMATIC CANE JUICE PROCESS Heckman x
1/22 AUTOMATED METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF NICOTINE ALKALOIDS IN Diffee X
CIGARETTE SMOKE USING CYANOGEN BROMIDE
1/28 AUTOMATED METHOD FOR DETERMINATION OF REDUCING AND TOTAL SUGARS Diffee ~C
IN TOBACCO
vmlD
SMOKE BALANCE CONTROLi II . COMPARISON OF pH OF SMOKE FROM WINSTON AND t"
6 2/15 MARLBORO CIGARETTES AND ANALYSIS OF THEIR FILTER MATERIAL •
7 2/26 SMOKE COMPOSITION : PUFFED VS . UNPUFFED TOBACCO BLEND %.~ Green & Schumacher
8 3/19 DICARBOXYCELLULOSE AS A TOBACCO SUBSTITUTE 0 Schumacher, et al
9 3/23 COLORIMETRIC DETMN . OF DIALDEHYDE IN DIALDEHYDE CELLULOSE as,, Musselwhite, et al
10 voto
11 v 0 l40
12 5/18 FLUbROMETRIC METHOD FOR DETMN . OF POLYNUCLEAR HYDROCARBONS IN Stamey, et a1

CIGARETTE SMOKE
5/27 STUDY OF SMOKE GENERATION AND FILTRATION ® Harris, James
~ 6/24 INSTRUMENT & METHOD FOR ANALYZING PARTICLE SIZE OF CIG . SMOKE Q Harrington & Myse1t
15 VOI to
16 7/29 REMOVAL OF CARBON MONOXIDE FROM CIG . SMOKE . II . DEVELOPMENT &'XOnolds & And rews
APPLN . OF RAPID METHOD FOR SCREENING PROSPECTIVE CO REMOVAL AGENTS I
17 8/5 ' TOBACCO ADDITIVES FOR REDUCTION OF CARBON MONOXIDE, HYDROGEN~ Andrews & Reynold
1CYANIDE & OXIDES OF NITROGEN IN CIGARETTE-SMOKE ` Wp`
18 9/17 EVALUATION OF MACHINE-MADE "C" FILTERS .,t_ ,Mwe, et al

19 9/20 ACTIVATED BAUXITES AS CIGARETTE FILTER ADDITIVES 1M''b' rjoeynolds & Andrews
20 9/16 RAPID THIN-LAYER METHOD FOR FLUOROMETRIC DETERMINATION OF (Ptamey, et al
. BENZO[aJPYRENE IN CIGARETTE SMOKE
OjL I .4
21 9/27 SELECTIVE FILTRATION OF GAS PHASE OF SMOKE o- Andrews & Reynolds
22 9/29 PROCESS FOR CONVERSION OF ACRYLONITRILE TO ACRYLAMIDE USING A Haefele & Young~
MANGANESE DIOXIDE CATALYST
23 10/18 ADDITIVES TO ENHANCE FORMATION OF AMADORI COMPOUNDS DURING AGING Dickerson, JamesK
24 10/28 EFFECT OF AGRICULTURAL CONDITIONS & PRACTICES ON THE EXPANSION ~~ ;redrickson, et al
OF TOBACCO BY G13-TYPE PROCESSES . V . TOBACCO TYPE, MARKET,
COMPANY GRADE, PARTICLE SIZE, AND FERTILIZATION
.~.~.-.~-
~Q~ .e i s 4- 7sl
•
ivo . Date Author(s)
1972
(\
1 1/4 DERIVATIVES OF 3,3,4,4-TETRAMETHYL-2-IMINOPYRROLIDINE H . Young/Dickerson
2 2/25 PHYSICAL PROBLEMS OF G-13 CIGARETTES Harris/Wheeler ^
3 2/29 FLOUVE ABSOLUTE : ISOLATION OF FLAVORFUL COMPONENTS Edwards/Rix/L1dy2i
4 3/20 ANALYSIS OF COCOA ON TOBACCO BY INDIRECT DETERMINATION OF Thacker/Martin/K

THEOBROMINE McHargue
5 3/27 SMOKE COMPOSITION : HOMOGENIZED VS . UNHOMOGENIZED TOBAC 0 BLEND

~ t,(,Orj ; Best - ~~
Schumacher/Gre `r
6 4/12 PREPARATION OF ARTHROBACTER WHOLE CELL AGGREGATES FOR THE

CONTINUOUS ENZYMATIC CONVERSION OF GLUCOSE TO FRUCTOSE
7 4/13 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHIC DETERMINATION OF CHLORINATED PESTICIDE

RESIDUES ON TOBACCO
8 4/27 USE OF ADDITIVES TO ENHANCE FORMATION OF AMADORI COMPOUNDS

DURING AGING . II .
r 5/2 AMADORI COMPOUNDS AS FLUE-CURED TOBACCO FLAVORANTS Dickerson, James ~
1_v 5/17 COMPOSITION OF THE CONDENSATE FROM STEAM FLOTATION EXHAUST Moates ~
11 5/31 AUTOMATED METHOD FOR DTMN . OF TOTAL &REDUCING SUGARS IN LIQUID SUGAR Diffee/Sheppard x
12 6/1 AUTOMATED METHOD FOR DTMN . OF TOTAL & REDUCING SUGARS IN LICORICE Diffee/Sheppard x
13 7/21 A STUDY OF THE DTMN . OF NICOTINE ALKALOIDS IN TOBACCO Diffee/Sheppard X
14 9/6 NICOTINE SALICYLATE AS A PRIMARY STANDARD FOR NICOTINE Diffee/Sheppard x
16 10/4 SYNTHESIS OF HERBICIDAL PYRIDINE & PIPERIDINE COMPOUNDS II Moates/Dickersonx
17 11/16 SYNTHESIS OF TOBACCO COMPONENTS AND FLAVORANTS Moates ~
18
19 12/7 FOREIGN SOLIDS ON TOBACCO Harris/Wheeler K

:
c. I. . . / . ~,~;urow, wr4el M e-1~~- v f 717~ x
El
i
•
~
.. ._.. ..___------..__._ ....._._._. - ___ _ ..._..._ .. _. ...___ .~.._- .__ ._. ..__ _ _ ._. . ~,
~
m
__. . . . .__. . ._ _____ _ .__ . . . . .._.__ ._.. _.-_ . . . .____ .__"^___ . ._. . ~_ . ..._ . . ..._.. .. . . .__ Cr1
N
. ;
. . . .. ._ ~ _ ~ . . .---•-- __._..-_ . . . ._ . . ..-_ .~_. .«__ . .._ . .. ._ .. .

.___._.._ . . . .... .__.- ._ .
~~ /s .y3 .....~. .
. .~,~;1~. . .__ ...._. ._ . . ... ... . ._.. . . ._ _ _ .. . . . s?.._ ._ ._ ~Ds ~~ . _
'fe. ..I s . ,.Clw. . . . .~~-
x. A4tr..:
;
..~ y ol~-
~ . `J ..
t .. .G'~.. ~' /1~ . ... .
. .~~ ,~.~o.~. .
:
;
i
.;
. . ,~ . . . . .._.__ . . ..~ . . . _ . _. . .. ._ .. .. ... .. . . ... ~_ . . . ._ . . . . . . . . .__ . . ~. . . . ._ ._ .. . ... ~_ . . .. . .. . . ~ . . .. . 4 . . . . . . .
, ~ .. ... . . . . .. . . . . . ._._. . . . . . . .__. .~ .. .~_ .~.~« _ ~.««.. ._ ...« ._... .._ . . . .__ . ____ . . ._ . . . . .. . . . ... . . .._ . . . . . ._. . . . .
;, .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .~ . . . _.___ ._. _ .r .. .~« ... ._~ .~~ ._.._ ._ .. . . . . . . . .. .. ._ . . . .. .._ . . . .. .._._ __ .. .__ .___ ._
. j . .._._ ._ .- ..- ... . . . . .._ . . __- ..__~_ . ._._._._~ ~.~_._ .~..__.._ . ._. _~._..__._.__...___. _ _ . .« . . . . . . . . . ._ . . ~
R
j,
i
. ` ~104<4 C-G • .
f .. .
e • Ay
•m Q.~
t
i
4
.
Ln
~ . . .__.._. ._ . _ . . ._ . _.._ . .-----•---•---•--- . . .. ... ._..____ . . ._ . . . . . ._ . . .. . _l:. . . .. .---- . . . _ ~
• 0
F
.
.• m~
N
. .. .. . _~___ ._ ~. . .. . . . ... . .__. .- .. -- O*,
Ln
m
._~~ . ..~ s ~~. . ._ w .
..:.. . .-- . . . . . . . ~-~ .__ _ . . .. ._.~ _
4-a ~
. .,~~..N.~ .<..~a ..
.a9 . ~
. a:~.,°'~~
t
. ~..._._ ._.._._ . .._. ._... .. __. :. _ ..._ ....__ ....: .-__ ... ._ __ . . . . .. ~
~%~tc, .csx.-~4~ _OrD-ot d-LO . . .
U v h,---
f
.. . ._ a,2 _
0 74
~-- :~~:_..:.. . _. .. . . .._ . . . _._ . . . . :~~=~: .._. . _ ~~..~~r~
,4-A-i ..a7. .
iar
~. ~. ~.~~ ~,~. . ..~. .P.Y~~ . .~~.. .

. . ..R.~~ ~~ ~„~ . .
. ~. r~ .~ ' . , .~ .
t
. . . . . . _._ ..._ ._ . . ... . ..... . ~,v. ~ . . ~ y.7.~ . . . ... . ~
. , ILPI~ . . .__ . . . . _ ._. . ..._._ .-~~'~': . ._ ..~ - : . . . . . . . ._. . . ._. _ . . . .. __ . . . . .. . _ ~ . . . ~ .. r
ll
zf
. .,~°..~. &MAW.
. . .. . .( .(i . ~61. ..c.,~~ G~- '~~r•• .c .y ./ .. . . . .
444c ,c G~.
OC Q .~
4:0
r ziIpi414J
1., ~ i . ~~-
.
. ~~ . .
L~~e ¢ .
C ~a, ~.G~
. .. _ . .~d.:,~••~ .. . ~1
. ;.. . _ . . ..._ _ . . __.. ... . . .. . . .__.. . ... _.._ ._~~-u
.`J, ~ ~..
..
f. . _ _ ~ _ ._. . . . . .._. _~
•
1o.,- irl>
.~. .~.~
C .» 7ow,
41
~ ;
4,4
.. Gr ~U . 72r~.~Gw ®
. C ~.
-a 17 -17 r9•,e :~r.,l~~,,,;

•T;~,
. ((//
. .~a ~'c.c,4.. .. . ..
. .. .- ._ . . . .. . . . _ . ... .., . . _. ._ _._.
I
a e. ,~ .,.J
Cr.,
-,7, A. 7ri -I - 4 . 40, 1

2
f,Ts-. ~'o
•
//- (. -Y~el
~ ~ 9
.~~~ (~.~.~~~a
~, . . . ..., . . .._ .._ ... . ..~`yl, ~.~ . .. .
.
.,
cn
N
Ol
_~ . lJ1
!
' /~prr / r ' 1'~
~~~ . _. .. ._ . . . . . . ... .. . . . .._ ~~~ cs~.
a "*' wy \ 1 , -K
. % : y~ .,
,
~ ..~~~~~..
4k - ..D E y~~.-.d .. nra
•: .
_~_. . ._ . .. . . ..
~
__ . .. ..; .. . ...
_ .._ « .. .__~~ ._. . . ._.. . ..~ ~ .«~. ._ .~._ ._. .~ . .
.~. _ . .. ._.t..._ _..~~ . «_ . _ . _ . . _ . . . . . ..__ .F _ . . . . . _.
_ . . ._ .~~_ ... t«._ ._«~~.~~_. . .. . .~ . ._. .

I 7
,. 2
i.
) - I- rz . .-Id ..~ ca.F r) J- Aa c~ .

.
°~""
3. ~., rti & . a.,~ .
414"~.A.:.,, .
.J .
f.:U,r- 34..z AW-10,
8-I/-tL
t
i
,v 1A
A /& :.
( i
~~ ' . I3
7ce
„, 5t-u- ~"
~~ J('~ &
!
1
.~
.i .
.: •
Ln
~
~
~
m
.. .
~ _ . . ., . . ~ .. . . .. .~- .... . . . . .. ..-. .-_ . . .. . .~-
~' .._ . . . . .t . ~ - ~--- ._ . . .. ._ .. ._. ._. ._.__-.. .._ ... . . . ._ _.. . .. ._ . . ... .. ... _ .. ..
, ._ .. . -~~~.~''~ . .. : .. ~
9
.4
,
,
. (P
S.
l.
;rb.;Jj6.A,.o .. . . . . •
t .__.. . . . r ~ ~
_
7
. . _..~ G~~.. . . . . ' ao ~ fLA -.D ,:
, ~. .. .
.V ._
~
, _n
. ._ . .____ . . .._ , . _ ._ .
..~
_. . . .. . . .~~;i".~. . ._ .._ .. ._ . . _ . .... . . _
. .~ . . .
__. _ .} ... ._ . . . . .. ...._..._ ._._.__. ..~_ . . . . ;w„~'
.~,~k .~:~p,,,
40 . .8
. 44461c~
1W . 7 &i4i4Z944 ",a- A
s d, ,
'
,f6s~ .'A 'OT . Gwl- . .
~/
.0&l4 .~~
,
.
I
~ d
,T~• " . '
~
,
/~49011,
;
oe .^74t'x I/ ;
.a. ~.
© . _. ~ ._ . . . .. .. . ~ ~ .
. . . ~i',e.c~G ,~Zua!y.. . . .. .. . . _ _ _
4
. . _,&c - .c, rr IA „ p
20 MA.II d
VI~
s
~ •f~, M• DoMiN6oKS R~A
~ ~o-z9 ~ ' ,pAy FL SHE1Ati.
~,~7G1
~~' ~ -r ~ ~
:P~REMpRT. N4DGE 4
. a~iD'1G ~,CCtl ~~•QwOv ~ µ • Ge Ro~ cEk
p ~,
$; rRA
,
~ _ , cNn
1
. .. _ ~
lit
.~.._ .__
q
!f?^_ • l . . .---•
-~----__. .----• -
.---------
._. __ . i._. _ . . _ ._..._.---- - --•-------~ -------~ ~ -•----

-.-~--- _.--- ---.-
__.__ -- ----~------ ;- - _ _ . - -- ;
, -~-- --- .
.- ._ ...- .
N
m
N
:.. ~ _-_. . . . .j .
F-~
.~r•--- .-
~`
~-_- a~ --~ --- -- rI rLE
__._-j IAAuZ
i
. _ .Y . . .. ..rt .__ _ _._.. . ._ . .-. .. .. . .. . . . . . ._ .
I
. . - . ..- _ .f . . .. . _ ! . _. i. .. -
.. .r ._ w . . . ..._ .. . .• . . ._ . ._-. . .. . .
1987
~.a
- . .,_ . .:_:+/T• 6F)k-

; 1
R(c 'Jl
-TNiT"-
. T11'LF-
S 51'71d7 7
wJ-
-Px- Cut -Jkv-L4, 16U44 ~ .. .
P
5117 y/2/f7 '4 d~.~

~~ ~ , VIY A
o• o
~ M ~
A~ut, ~~:a.Gth Up&rA, ~ICU4*
l'k~b,1977 RFroRr)
,, „ a j"
fAAadX60 "JI-9Lata"
' •
-Z~~G`,G~y'
P •0?Q
l~/j~'~,,
~~m
Ln
N
J
W
_. ~
TITIE ZSS 7) . . R E{ :D
J'q , ., , ~
47 r • -
7-
- - - -
. w. nr; . ~Ado;~ OA
G
9`DA
EC!b
~ ~9~ .~~r
-~f D '~~K .~~-r,~'t '.r
~~j/q~9Q ~
,
:
. : . . .
: 1-
0 D Q/
0
• • .
Job
~ 9 ..
51710 5277
,
T%Y4-L0,- .
r !
Ps~:dped DAfe v.a~e i
. 1?ecS~d_
ec .~ y ~f~ed~
CS~
••4'biy Ii,L
m9os y - 7lyo . .)
d
./6/qa c
I / 4 J
!
t
•
.~
.rr /R}~i~ {Iqrl V
I n t er-off i ce Memo~ran d um
~ Subject : Nicotjpe and Smoker Satisfaction Date : January 4, 1978
P..y s3
To: Dr . Alan Rodgman

SECRET From : D . H . Piehl
OBJECTIVES :
The ultimite goal of this research is to provide the means to maximize
smoker satisfaction for all RJR cigarette brands, with particular emphasis on
low''tar" cigarettes .
Specific 1977-78 objectives are :

1 . Determine the taste_ characteristics of nicotine and factors that
affect its perception .
Determine the means to alter and control "tar"/nicotine ratio and
inc A Y icotine transfer efficienc . r
r3 .' Define the optimum nicotine level in cigarette sroke required to

maxi:mize moker satis action . etermine the existence of a minimum or
r"'"'thre*i value of nicotine required for satisfaction .
Identify any other factors that are important to smoker satisfaction .
, 1 . Nicotine Taste and Perception

~
~M4 Good progress has been made on defining the taste and perception of nicotine
and this objective is nearly met . However, future work will be aimed at an
attempt to establish nicotine limits with respect to irritation and more direct
correlation with smoke .
•Nicotine is irritatin - All of the evidence on the taste of nicotine, '
eitherin solution or in aerosol form, supports the conclusion that it is harsh,
particularly in the back of the throat, and contributes to tongue bite and nasal
sting . The intensity of irritation is related to concentration . Panel tests with
a new monadic ballot also show that smokers highly associate perceived irritation
and nicotine strength with actual smoke nicotine level . Nicotine irritation can
be masked by the addition of certain acids and sugars, but high levels are required .
•Some nicotine irritation is necessar - Nost panel smokers describe their

ideal c garette as av ng some rr tat on and moderate nicotine strength . However,
most test cigarettes and competitive brands are rated as too irritating . This
suggests that there is a desired nicotine level for optimum taste, tw t it may or o
may not be related to the level required for optimum satisfaction . ~
. N
RJR2106
RJRI FORM 2422-Rvv . 7/70
2
•There is a threshold value for detection of nicotine - Tests with

nicotine-water so utions s ow t at very low concentrat~ons of nicotine are
still detectable (ti .005% w/w compared to ti6x for smoke) and buffering capacity
of saliva is sufficiently great to offset any differences in pH of the solution .
However, when nicotine is in aerosol form, similar to smoke, a higher concentra-
tion is required to be detected . It is clear that nicotine taste is concentra-
tion dependent, but it is not clear how this relates to smoke, and the threshold
value for nicotine irritation has not been established .
•"Tar" masks nicotine taste - The "tar" level and "tar"/nicotine ratio
are important to t e-perce ve taste of nicotine . In triangle tests wtih small
panels and the Reynolds #1 cigarette, smokers can distinguish a cigarette with
11 .1 mg "tar" and 1 .4 mg nicotine (T/N = 7 .9) from a control cigarette with the
same blend without nicotine, but surprisingly cannot distinguish a cigarette
with higher "tar" (26 .5 mg) and nicotine (1 .76 mg) (T/N - 15 .1) from a control
cigarette without nicotine, due to an apparent masking effect .
•Puff volume affects taste - Harshness was found to increase linearly with
the concentration o per puff in controlled puffs delivered to smokers .
Nasal sting and tongue bite also increase, but not as sharply at large puff
volu Flavor and preference increase linearly up to the TPM level delivered
by t rage puff then preference decreases and flavor shows marked curvature
at 1 t-puff volumes .
{iLit le nicotine transfers to saliva - Experiments to neasure how much

icot s trans erre from t e smo e to the mouth have shown that an average
0-40 difference) of the nicotine taken into the mouth remains there, but
nly l-~ •of available nicotine transfers to the saliva . This residual nicotine
in t 1 cavity may be further implicated with taste or aftertaste .
2 . "Tar_*Nicotine Ratio and Nicotine Transfer Efficiency

Iwo
Good information on the contribution of individual blend components and
tobacco type to "tar" and nicotine delivery has been obtained . It has been
demonstrated that blending alone can greatly alter T/N ratio, while to date
other techniques, such as adding nicotine or other additives,have been less
expedient . No breakthroughs in substantially increasing nicotine transfer ~
efficiency were achieved . Work in 1978 is aimed at determining how nicotine is _j
bound in tobacco and transferred to smoke so that specific means for increasing m
transfer efficiency might be developed . Ln
N
The question of what T/N ratios are optimum at various"tar''deliveries is N
still unresolved . Most of the evidence suggests that full flavor cigarettes
(>15 mg "tar") have sufficient nicotine . In fact, Marlboro continues to show
increased T/N ratio . At low "tar" delivery (<10 mg "tar") the most acceptable
experimental'blends, have T/N ratios no lower than 9 or 10 . Our best 1977 Research
low "tar" cigarette designs have T/N ratios of 10 and 11 at a "tar" delivery of
7 mg• ow
~
~
RJR2107
3
%Flue-cured tobacco most im ortant nicotine contributor - Data collected

on major components show t at ue-cure tobacco has t e i ghest tobacco to
smoke nicotine transfer efficiency (14%) . Flue-cured tobacco also has the
lowest smoke T/N ratio (10) and is usually the largest blend component . There-
fore, despite the fact that burley tobacco usually has a higher nicotine level,
flue-cured tobacco contributes more nicotine in most blended cigarettes than -
any other blend component . However, uncased burley tobacco has a nicotine
transfer efficiency comparable to that for flue-cured tobacco . G7 has the
lowest nicotine transfer efficiency (8 .4%) and a high smoke T/N ratio (23)
and therefore contributes the least nicotine to the smoke . Experimental blends
with T/N ratios Aown to 5 were prepared demonstrating that very low T/N ratios
can be achieved at low "tar" delivery, but all of these cigarettes were disliked
by smokers .
•Added nicotine transfers less efficientl - Experiments with nicotine

added as t e free base an as ma ate sa t to various blend components show that
it transfers less efficiently (6-8") than inherent nicotine and with little
difference between tobacco types . These results do not agree with some litera-
ture reports . However, much higher transfer efficiencies were achieved when
nicotine malate was added to the denicotinized tobacco used in the Reynolds #1
ciga
ticed casing lower "tar"/nicotine ratio - A comprehensive P.SM-designed

casi" s u y sho .ved s~gni icant pre erence or a 4IINSTOy-tyce cigarette with
~i-edu~e sing . The cigarette design with a minimum "tar"/nicotine ratio and
~al so gas-phase delivery had approximately a 30% reduction in total sugar,
4~lico nd cocoa .
rw.%rlboro i ncreases T/N rati o whi 1 e WINSTON remai ns constant - A hi storical

stud 'IN T N and ~•;ar boro tar' a-n-a n cotine va ues s owzd that with the
exc~~
e ,, of annual crop variations and a gradual decrease in "tar", WINSTON
T/N rat o has remained relatively constant since 1972 . However, there have been
several apparently intentional major changes in Marlboro since 1969 that have
caused its 7/N ratio to increase significantly . This was achieved by reduction
in "tar", but even greater reduction in smoke nicotine . It would appear that
the Marlboro T/N ratio is trending in the opposite direction compared to WINSTON .
Compensation for an increased T/N ratio by increasing smoke pH and therefore
higher free nicotine is not'the total explanation, because WINSTON pH has increased
to the point that the free nicotine values for both WINSTON and Marlboro are now ,
much closer, the Marlboro still having a higher value .
Somehow annual crop variations are leveled out very effectively, in Marlboro
and although the changes that are probably intentional are seemingly in the
wrong direction, the consumer appears to have proven them right . We must admit
that they likely know something that we do not .
3 . 0 tp imum and Threshold Nicotine Values
Little progress has been made on defining the optimum nicotine value to
maximize satisfaction and no progress has been made on defining the existence
of a threshold or minimum value . However, a consumer study planned for 1978 is
intended to help shed some light here and progress has been made on designing
test cigarettes for this study .
RJR2108
51710 5283
4
a.Ex erimental blends reoared - Ideally, a series of test cigarettes

with t e same tar de iveryan taste characteristics, but varying nicotine
level is required to determine optimum and minimum nicotine requirenents . The
same test series should then be repeated at different "tar" deliveries so that
both high and low "tar" cigarettes are evaluated . If possible, pH should also
be controlled as an independent variable . Except for Reynolds #1 cigarettes
with various levels of added nicotine, test cigarettes of this type, meeting
all requirements, have never been successfully prepared . In 1977 some success
was achieved in preparing test cigarettes at "tar" levels of 5, 10 and 15 mg/cigt
with various nicotine values and T/N ratios from M to 22 .5 . Taste characteristics
were held reasonably constant so that trends could be observed with the Research
booth panel and a new monadic ballot . As reported under the section on nicotine
taste a high correlation was observed for reported irritation and nicotine strength
with actual smoke nicotine level . No success was achieved in the variation of pH
independent of nicotine level .
•Preliminar o timum nicotine value identified - The preliminary data above

apparent y revea an opt mum n co ine eve o , mg/puff . These results
•should be regarded as unconfirmed at this point . However, it is of interest to
speculate since the value for tiINSTON has usually been over 0 .15 mg/puff and the
valutA wMarlboro 0 .13 mg/puff or less .
l . ioloQical response to nicotine difficult to quanti .fy - Measurement

of t p sioT-ogical response to nicotine by some rapt and non-invasive technique
r0oul be convenient indication of nicotine satisfaction . Nicotine is known to
~ause ' mber of small changes, such as increased pulse and heart rate, decreased
empee e of the fingertips, and altered EEG . Pilot studies on the measurement
f f .• ip temperature and pulse rate for a small group of Research subjects
showe i ferences before, during and after smoking, but they were almost impossible
M,
.to qu ate . Individual differences and day-to-day variations are great . There
is li expectation that a successful technique will be discovered, but we will
continue~o search .
•Consumer stud bein lanned - Together with Marketing Research a special

consumer stu yIs being eslgne t at will involve the use of the experimental
cigarettes described above . Smoking habits, cigarette consumption and preferences
will be followed for a large representative consumer panel with the aim of
establishing optimum and minimum nicotine levels as well as obtaining a better
understanding of smoker satisfaction . Final plans will be completed in January
with results scheduled for 4th quarter 1978 . We will work closely with MRD through-
out this study and with•their consumer psychologist, if they hire one .
4 . Other Factors Important to Smoker Satisfaction

•Im ortance of smoke pH is unclear - The role of smoke pH in smoker satisfac-
tion is no c ear . t s o v ous y important to taste, but how this relates to
nicotine level and T/N ratio is not well established . It has also usually been
assumed .that smoke pH determined "free nicotine" content of the smoke, and it
is calculated on that basis . However, recent evidence suggests that "free nicotine"
in the mouth is determined by the pH of the smoker's saliva . It is hoped .that ~,
experimental cigarettes can be designed with smoke pH as an independent variable . W
but the probability for success is low . ~+
' • R J R2109 - 51710 5284

5
9Smokin behavior is bein activel studied - An increasing amount of

research n the wor d is being devoted to smo ing behavior . Unfortunately
most of it is aimed at smoking cessation . The importance of smoking behavior
and basic motivations for smoking could be critical to understanding smoker
satisfaction . Unlocking the key to smoking pleasure or the positive motiva-
tions for smoking whether they be physiological or psychological, could mean
the difference between success or failure of future tobacco products . RJR is
funding some basic research on the relationship between personality and smoking
behavior and we will stay abreast of that research as well as staying up-to-date
through the use of outside consultants . Together with these consultants we will
decide on the desirability of hiring our own in-house behavioral scientist .
•~Nicotine pha~rmaco~loa - There are no plans to do any in-house research

relate to o icotine pharmacology, but 'recent research on brain chemistry suggests
that certain chemicals, some of which are nicotine-like alkaloids, act on the
"pleasure centers" of the brain . In fact, some researchers are actively working
on nicotine and its role in brain chemistry in an attempt to identify how it works .
This research could provide breakthroughs in understanding nicotine satisfaction
and we will at least try to keep up-to-date with the literature .
COPag.U$IONS :
?°"lde have yet to adequately understand smoking satisfaction . Obviously,

" nic in• is important but just how important has not been defined . The relation-
""ship een nicotine taste and nicotine satisfaction is not clear . Smokers
a ,app be able to identify nicotine on the basis of its taste, which they
ass with irritation, but surprisingly cannot detect, on the basis of taste
alo e, v ey high levels of nicotine when accompanied by high "tar" delivery and
'ther high T/N ratios . Whether upon extended smoking they would be able to
dist sh different nicotine levels on the basis of nicotine response alone
is not kriown . Nicotine taste and satisfaction may be totally independent responses .
Although it appears that T/N ratios below 10 are not required, these results
are based primarily on taste and limited smoking . An extended-use consumer study
hopefully will be more definitive in identifying optimum and minimum nicotine
levels . Increased nicotine may not be required in the near future, particularly
with record high nicotine values for flue-cured tobacco in 1976 and 1977, but
we must be prepared for those low nicotine crops that will surely come . .
We have made substantial progress in obtaining general knowledge, but as

in all new research areas, we have probably raised more new questions than we
have answered .
6
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS :
The work to date represents the combined effort of several different

groups in two sections . The following individuals have contributed :
Dr . W . M . Henley Dr . M . E . Stowe
Dr . J . P . Dickerson Dr . C . E . Rix
Dr . C . L . Neumann Dr . D. Lynm
Mr . M . D . Shannon Dr . T. A . Perfetti
Mrs . M-J . Wallace
:ki
*2h1'1'l
SECRET
~~ ~
Authors : Thomas A . PerlfilEQi ~`°'~ Y anuary 30, 1978
• Lawrence E . Nayes
Division : Chemical Research Notebook Pages : 306351-306353
CIM, 1978, No . 2 Dated . . : January 26,. . 1978

No . of Pages : 2 Previous Reports : None
Disclosure No :
.IMPROVED AMMONIATED RECONSTITUTED SHEET
SUMMARY :
Chemically bonding ammonia ;as the pectate amide and nicotine as the
pectate salt into ammoniated reconstituted sheet should improve the nicotine
transfer a vor of RJR•tobacco products .
\ MEMORANDUM :}
~~ m0cotit nsfer may be increased by the incorporation of ammonia

~~ i n ~:4forin 't.he pectate amida in reconstituted tobacco sheet . This may
be~"M.1,eved ~ hddiifhhh
e aton o ammonium pospate eitern the form ih of te
mono- or di ium phosphate in the pulping process . It is known that
ammonia is to breaak down the pectin in tobacco . It is believed that
pectin chemi ~~y binds the ammonia and available nicotine as the amide and
nicotinic sa I-respectively . T.hese compounds, therefore, will be chemically
bound into the s•heet . The transfer•of nicotine may be enhanced by this
process since the nicotine pectate is relatively thermally stable . The
temperature needed for the release of free nicotine from this salt occurs at
a temperature higher than that needed for pyrolysis of nicotine . What this
may mean is that in our present reconstituted sheet where most of the nicotine : :
is sprayed onto the surface, pyrolysis of nicotine may be taking place before a :
sufficient quantity is transferred . The proposed ammoniated sheet should
resist nicotine pyrolysis and merely cleave the salt releasing more intact,
freein cot
i nein to t h e ma i
nstream 0
. ur present
i ammont a ed uses ammon
.s ee th ia
~ gas . It has been shown in our laboratories that this ammonia is predominately
adsorbed in some manner onto the sheet . This ammonia is released on standing
and can be removed entirely by heating at 80-90° C for a short period of time
(1 hr .) . The Philip Morris sheet also releases some aminonia but seems'to
transfer more nicotine than our sheet . It is our belief that a portion of the
ammonia and most of the available nicotine are chemically bound in the sheet .
The taste of WINSTON A using the ammoniated sheet resembles Phi1i Morris'
Marlboro but on heat treatment the WINSTON A reverts back to WINSTON while the
Marlboro retains its same taste .
,r
Distribution :
Dr . A . H . Laurene, Dr . M . Senkus(file)
Dr . A, Rodgman, Dr . H . J . Bluhm,
Library (file)
Mr . R. H . Cundiff
Dr . D . H. Pieh1, Dr . M . E . Stowe (file)
Mr . J. A. Giles, Mr . J . P. Clingman,
Dr. W. L . Clapp, Dr . C . T. Mansfield,
Dr. J . T . Dobbins, Dr. W . M. Henley,
Dr . J . N . Schumacher, Library (file)
Dr. T . A. Perfetti
Mr . L . E . Hayes
~..
~
RJR23g10
2
Considering the facts that :
1 . The blends of Marlboro and WINSTON are very similar

except for the type of reconstituted sheet,
2. WINSTON A and Marlboro both use ammoniated sheets and

resemble each other in taste, and .
3 . On heat treatment WINSTON A reverts to WINSTON but
Marlboro retains its identity,
the composition of the twb different reconstituted~sheels represent the
major difference .
It is our belief that if ammonia is incorporated into our sheet, in its
preparation, that both amidation and salt formation will occur and will afford :';
a better, more stable reconstituted sheet exhibiting the properties of the
Philip Morris sheet and hopefully increasing the nicotine transfer .
Distribut_io_n_a
Read and understood by me :
f. ~
&A .. I 3a
Ai ness
•' l. ~ .J
~~~
' • FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
TVaslilng ton, D.C. 20S80
OFFICE OF lNFORMATlON M-6800 Ext. 197 .
For ItCLEASE:It.4EDIAT%, Friday, tlarch 25, 1956 . ~-
, The Federal Trade Cosmission today announced that it has sent identical letters
~ to each of the nation's major cigarette manufactui•ers and to Mr . Robert D . Meyner,
: Administrator ot The'Cigarette Advertising Code, Inc ., in regard to factual state-

sunts of tar annicotino
d' content on labels and in advertising of cigarettes . ,
,
~ The text of the letter is as follows : .
.i
i
i i . , Gentlemens
. The Cigarette Advertising Guides promulgated by the Commission in
, September 1953 provided that no representation should be made that "any .
brand or cigarette or the smoke therefrom is low in nicotine or tars * w* '
when it has not been established by competent scientific proof applicable
at the ti wa o f di ssem i nation that the claim is true , and if true , that ;
such difference or differences are significant ." On the basis of the ~
---•--••--••- •• facts now available to it, the Cosmission has determined that a factual .• .
statement of the(ar and nicotine content (expressed in milligrams) of ~
the mainstream ar.oT ce lrom a cigarette vould not be ! a vi ola tion of such
Guides, or of any of the provisions of law administered by the Co=sission,
so long as (1) no collateral representations (other than factual state-
meats of tar end nicotine contents of cigarettes offered for sale to the ,
public) are made, expressly or by implication, as•to reduction or elimina-
; , , tion of health haaards, and (2) the statement of tar and nicotine content
is supported by adequate records of tests conducted in accordance with
the Cambridge Filter Method, as described in an article entitled " Deterrai -
nation of Particulate Matter and Alkaloids (as Nicotine) in Cigarette
Smoke," by C .,L . Ogg, which appeared in the Journal .of the Association ~ :
. of Of,ficial Agricultural Chemists, Vol . 47, No . 2, 1964 . It is the
Comission's position that it is in the public interest to promote the
• dissemination of truthful information concerning ,eigarettes which msy be
materi~al and desired by the consuming public . ~•-
~' . Hy direction of the Cosoaission .
Joseph W . Shea,
Seereteay.
,
O
r

XN The United :'states District Court

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

XN The United :'states District Court

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

xN THE UNITED :`STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN .DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

$TEVEN R . . ARCH ; WILLIAM BARNES, ) .:

TRANSCRIPT of testimony as taken by and

before LINDA RUSSELL, :a Certified Shorthand

Reporter and Notary . Public of'the State of

North Carolina, at the offices of Womble Carlyle

Sandridge & Rice, :200 West Second Street,

Winston=Salem, North`Carolina, on Monday,

1997, commencing at . 9 :28 in the

SUPREME -COURT .OF THESTATE OF NEW YORK

------- --- ------- -- --•-----------

LOkILLARD TOBACCOCOMPANY, INC ., ) Index No .

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YOR K

__._- ,.__....___ ..,.. .---------------

R .J .REYNOLDS TOBACCOCOMPANY, ) Index No .

SUPREME COURT OF THE 'STATE OF NEW YORK

-- -- ------ ---- -- -•±-------- ----- -- )

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

'WAaA &`SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

SUPREME COURT OF THE ESTATE OF NEW YORK

WAdA & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

SHELLER, .LUDWIG & BADEY

`CLIMACO, CLIMACO, LEFKOWITZ &

GOODKIND LABATON,RUDOFF & SUCHAROW L .L .P .

-WOMBLE CARLYLE :-SANDRIDGE & RICE

WAGh,' .& SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE

MCCALL DOUGHTON & BLANCATO

MILLER & MARTIN .

WAG4A' & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

WITNESS REcR,osS REDIRECT RECROSS

VIDEOGRAPHER : We're going on the

2 record . The time is 9 :28 . This is the videotape

deposition of Alan Rodgman, Ph .D ., taken by the

4 plaintiff in the matters'of William P . Perry and

Sandra Perry, Plaintiffs, versus Brown &

Williamson Tobacco Corporation, ;et al .,

7 Defendants . Case number, civil action .2-473-95 .

8 Also the case Phyllis Small, et al .,

Plaintiffs, again .st Lorillard ;Tobacco Company,

10 Incorpora,ted,-et :al ., .Defendants . Index number

12 Plus the case of Mary Ann Hoskins,

13 et al . Plaintiffs, .against RJR Tobacco Company,

14 et al ., Defendants . Index number 110951/96 .

15 Plus'the case of Sharlene Hoberman,

16 et al ., Plaintiffs, against Brown & Williamson

17 Tobacco Corporation,>et al ., Defendants . Index

19 Plup the case .of Rose Frosina, et al . I

20 Plaintiffs, against Philip Morris, Incorporated,

21 .et al ., Defendants . Index number .110950/96 .

22 Plus the case of Catherine Zito,

23 et al ., Plaintiffs, against the American Tobacco

24 Company, Incorporated,,et al ., Defendants . Index

WAGA & SPINELLI (201) 992-4111

This deposition is being held at the

2 offices of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, 200 --

MS : KNISELYs Excuse us . The main

4 caption is Arch .' This is what it --

VIDE04RAPHERa Okay, I have that also .

o.,, y o.u want -me to

8 VIDEOaRAPHER : Also the case of Steven

9 R . Arch, et al,, Plai,ntiffs, versus Brown &

__._- ,....._ ..,.. .---------------