a b s t r a c tThere is a drive toward the mandated lowering and reporting of selected toxicants in tobacco smoke. Several studies have quantified the mainstream cigarette emissions of toxicants, providing benchmark levels. Few, however, have examined how measured toxicant levels within a single product vary over time due to natural variation in the tobacco, manufacturing and measurement. In a single centre analysis, key toxicants were measured in the tobacco blend and smoke of 3R4F reference cigarette and three commercial products, each sampled monthly for 10 months. For most analytes, monthly variation was low (coefficient of variation <15%); but higher (P20%) for some compounds present at low (ppb) levels. Reporting toxicant emissions as a ratio to nicotine increased the monthly variation of the 9 analytes proposed for mandated lowering, by 1-2 percentage points. Variation in toxicant levels was generally 1.5-1.7-fold higher in commercial cigarettes compared with 3R4F over the 10-month period, but increased up to 3.5-fold for analytes measured at ppb level. The potential error (2CV) associated with single-point-intime sampling averaged $20%. Together, these data demonstrate that measurement of emissions from commercial cigarettes is associated with considerable variation for low-level toxicants. This variation would increase if the analyses were conducted in more than one laboratory.

No abstract

The WHO Tobacco Product Regulation Study Group (TobReg) has proposed three regulatory models for cigarettes, each creating mandatory limits for emissions of nine smoke toxicants. One approach proposes country-specific limits, using median or 1.25× median toxicant/nicotine emission ratios. A second model provides fixed toxicant-ratio limits. The third model limits were three times the lowest toxicant emission on a market. Currently, the practical implications of these models are largely unknown. An impact assessment was conducted using cigarette data from 79 countries to identify four diverse test markets. We sampled all products from each market but limited product availability led to incomplete (80-97%) sourcing. Analysis showed that the country-specific model led to diverse (up to threefold) toxicant limits across the four markets. 70%-80% of products were non-compliant, rising to 100% in some countries with the second and the third models. With each regulatory model the main drivers of non-compliance were the tobacco-specific nitrosamines, the simultaneous application of limits for nine poorly correlated smoke toxicants, and analytical variability. Use of nicotine ratios led to compliance of some high toxicant emission products due to high nicotine emissions. Our findings suggest that these proposals would have greater impact on global markets than TobReg's stated aims.