1

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

AssessingReduced Ignition Propensity (RIP)

Cigarettes – Facts, Fiction and

Manipulations

by Hemant Goswamihemant@burningbrain.org

2

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Reduced Ignition Propensity (Fire Safe) Cigarettes

Background

Since about last twenty years the concept of developing fire safe cigarettes has been highlighted from time to time. Such cigarettes have recently been introduced in the market and have been labelled as Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarettes (RIP). Many governments across the world are going ahead with legislations to make RIP cigarettes mandatory. It has been claimed that such cigarettes will reduce cigarette caused fire by as much as 68 percent.

Context

In 2003 New York made RIP cigarettes mandatory through legislation. The following year five other states signed similar legislation. In 2005, Health Canada also announced “Cigarette Ignition Propensity Regulations”.

3

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

What is RIP??

It is claimed that Reduced Ignition Propensity (RIP) (also referred as fire-safe) cigarette has a reduced propensity to burn when left unattended.

It is further claimed that the most common fire-safe technology used by cigarette manufacturers is to wrap cigarettes with two or three thin bands of less-porous paper that act as “speed bumps” to slow down a burning cigarette. If a fire-safe cigarette is left unattended, the burning tobacco will reach one of these speed bumps and self-extinguish.

It is emphasised that RIP/Fire-safe cigarettes meet an established cigarette fire safety performance standard (based on ASTM E2187, Standard Test Method for Measuring the Ignition Strength of Cigarettes).

4

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

What is Claimed?

1. RIP will save 900 lives per annum in the USA lost to structural fires2. RIP will reduce the fires by two third of the present rate3. It’s will make smoking and cigarettes more safe in terms of the ignitibility4. The name “Fire- Safe” is being associated with RIP5. It has been claimed that these cigarettes have gone through stringent

testing 6. Further claimed that RIP is already saving lives in New York, where it was

introduced in 2003

But reliable, verifiable and authentic reference to all these claims is missing… not a single independent and primary reference is available.

5

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Testing Method - ASTM standard E2187-02b

Procedure : Testing of cigarettes was conducted in accordance with the ASTM standard E2187-02b "Standard Test Method for Measuring the Ignition Strength of Cigarettes". The test steps are provided below:

1. Turn on the exhaust system designated for removal of test combustion products 30 min prior to beginning testing.

2. Ensure that the filter paper holder is in the test chamber at the geometric center of its bottom. Cover the chimney on the test chamber.

3. Conduct the test using 10 layers of filter paper. 3.1 Immediately before testing, place the proper number of filter papers on the filter paper holder

and place the metal test rim on top. Discard filter papers that will not lay flat. 3.2 Place the cigarette holder on the floor of the chamber, just forward of the center of the filter

paper holder. 4 Without delay, remove a cigarette from the conditioned space. Insert the unmarked end of the

cigarette into the cigarette ignition system and hold it in a horizontal position. Turn on the air draw. Hold the ignition flame just in front of the marked end of the cigarette for as long as is necessary to achieve uniform ignition without passing the 5 mm mark. During the ignition process, the cigarette shall be rotated as needed to obtain an approximately symmetrical burn. Note: If the operator is performing concurrent determinations in multiple test chambers, the operator shall not light a third cigarette until each of the first two cigarettes has been placed on its respective set of filter papers. No more than two cigarettes shall be in the pre-burn stage at any time.

5 Holding the cigarette vertically, coal end up and under a 600 ml beaker, transport the cigarette to the test chamber.

5.1 Place the lit cigarette, in a horizontal position with the cigarette paper seam up, in the cigarette holder.

5.2 Simultaneously close the door and remove the chimney cover.5.3 If the cigarette self-extinguishes while in the cigarette holder, terminate the determination

and record the results as a self-extinguishment, noting that this occurred in the holder. This attempt shall count as a valid determination. The test operator shall be permitted to re-use this set of sheets of filter paper. However, if the room is not at the standard conditioning temperature and humidity, the paper shall be reconditioned in the humidity chamber.

5.4 When the cigarette has burned to the 15 mm mark, simultaneously cover the chimney and open the chamber door, gently remove the cigarette from the holder, and move the holder to the front corner of the test chamber.

5.5 Gently lay the cigarette with the ash still attached onto the top of the filter papers so that the nonignited end is placed between the appropriately sized cigarette anti-roll parallel metal pins. The cigarette paper seam shall be turned up. Do not drop the cigarette onto the filter papers and do not press the coal into the papers. If the ash falls off during any part of the transport or positioning process, terminate the determination and begin again; do not count the attempt.

5.6 Without delay, simultaneously remove the chimney cover and gently close the door.

6. Observe the burning cigarette. The smoke plume near the cigarette must remain undisturbed. If it does not, the chamber and exhaust system shall be re-checked. If the chamber and exhaust system are behaving properly, but the particular test cigarettes continue to produce disturbed smoke plumes, this observation shall be noted on the test sheet.

7. Record the following results: 7.1 Any of the tobacco column burns to or past the front plane of the tipping paper

(filter tip cigarettes) or past the tips of the metal pins for non-filter tip cigarettes; or

7.2 The burning ceases before reaching the front plane of the tipping paper (filter tip cigarettes) or the tips of the metal pins for non-filter tip cigarettes.

7.3 The observations stated in 10.5.3 and 10.6.

8. Ensure that neither the cigarette nor the filter papers are burning.

9. Open the test chamber door to allow air to circulate throughout its volume. After the chamber has cleared, prepare for the next determination.

10. Repeat the determination with each cigarette 40 times per test. Calculate the fraction of determinations in which the cigarettes burned their full length. This fraction is the test result.

6

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

How the standards were developed?

The Technical Study Group which ran from 1984 to 1987 and then a Technical Advisory Group which ran from 1990 to 1993, (the 20 years long study; referred by some) was dominated (and studies done in association) by the tobacco industry.

All the golden standards were pushed by the industry; especially Phillips Morris

It complimented the research done by their R & D Departments

The final testing methodology was devised by Phillips Morris which was also used by “National Institute of Standards and technology” and later adopted by “American Society for Testing of Materials” which was later known as ASTM standard E2187-02b "Standard Test Method.”

Promotional Video by Phillip Morris

(About Paper Select)

7

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

How safe is fire-safeOctober 2007: California Forest Fire

RIP is not useful to prevent real world

outdoor fires

Statistics from NY do not support the safety claims

and logic of RIP. There were less civilian fatalities

in 2004 than 2005 and 2006.

Press Interview by Phillip Morris Spokesperson

Rip has been tested only in controlled conditions. In perfect lab conditions which does not take into account the real life environment; so it is claimed that RIP might be effective in preventing only STRUCTURAL FIRES.

Even PM’s document point out that out of the 500 fabrics tested, the results were negative in 150. So these 150 were excluded.

Wind conditions, Moisture, Slant, Direction, Height of fall, ignitability between bands, etc. nothing was taken into consideration. Many important parameters were sacrificed for getting consistent test results.

8

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Tracking the recent events

In 2003 New York Fire Safety Department adopted the RIP parameters and passed a law on “Reduced Ignition Propensity” cigarettes

(There was no consultation with the health department and/or and research/study done by the scientific community to assess any changes due to mechanical modification of the cigarettes)

The testing parameter/methodology was actually devised by Phillip Morris

Subsequently 20 US states also moved ahead with legislation. The New York law is taken as the reference.

Canada also enacted a law on Fire safe Cigarettes. The New York law is taken as the reference. The position paper liberally quotes from Phillip Morris and R J Reynolds research.

Australia and UK are in the final phases. The New York example is taken as the reference. BAT oppose the move but PM stays neutral and raises only token protest.

9

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The dangerous CROSS OVERThe New York “Reduced Ignition Propensity” cigarettes were developed by the New York Fire Safety Department in association with ASTM and tested only the ignitability of cigarettes. No health effects were ever considered. There was no consultation with the health department and/or and research/study done by the scientific community to assess any changes due to mechanical modification of the cigarettes.

It was not at all a public health issue but rather a question of fire safety.

There has been no scientific assessment/research on the health effects of RIP on current smokers. There has been no scientific and/or behavioural study to assess the possible effect of more frequent and deeper puffing and inhalations.

However when the RIP concept crossed geographical borders

It was adopted by the HEALTH DEPARTMENTS & TOBACCO CONTROL BODIES without any independent assessment and without realising that there has been no study by the health department in the New York case and a detailed analysis of effect of changed design on “Nicotine Delivery” has never been studied at all. It has been done by CANADA, where Health Canada came out with a detailed position (research) paper, based on secondary data and even made a law. Australia and UK are on the path to adopt RIP on the same secondary (industry) data.

It’s a dangerous cross over…………..missed by the scientific community

10

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry interestDocument dated: March 25, 1988

Phillip Morris Strategic plan 1989

11

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry interestPhillip Morris Strategic plan 1989

12

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Tracking the industry documents Phillip

Morris Strategic plan 1989 (Bate 2021556680)

13

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry interestProject Tomorrow is a major R&D program designed to address ignition propensity. Congress has mandated that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) develop a test that will be used to make decisions regarding the feasibility of the design of cigarettes with low ignition propensity. PM U.S.A. must design a test to verify that the decisions made are not based on flawed information. Project Tomorrow includes

1) the development of such a test,2) computer modelling of a smoldering cigarette in contact with a flammable

substrate, 3) the development of banded cigarette papers and 4) low mass burn rate cigarettes as potential means of reduction of ignition

propensity while maintaining consumer subjective acceptability.

[Page 68-69 of Phillip Morris U.S.A. Confidential Strategic Plan 1993-1997 --- Bates: 2021523004-5]

14

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry intentions

15

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry intentions

16

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The tobacco industry studies

17

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Strategy Changed

The industry tone changed after 1994 after many papers were patented. It was a

new strategy…..

18

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Who owns the patent to the paper used in RIP cigarettes?

This answer also hold the key to understand the careful ploy by the powerful Industry sharks.

Philip Morris (PM) and Schweitzer-Mauduit International holds the joint EXCLUSIVE patent of the RIP paper.

So is this also a patent war? It's also a question of grabbing the largest market share and controlling the smaller players… and much more. Who gets direct commercial benefit with the new regulation?

The position paper by BAT (Australia) clearly opposes RIP. In the position paper, BAT also make logical arguments about the effectiveness of RIP. Notably PM is absent from most of these meetings. What options does BAT have, if the patent to the RIP paper is with PM and the government is bent upon patronizing the same PM paper? The reasoning of BAT in the light that the new standards fixed by NY (Which are likely to be copied) endorsing PM’s patented paper technology (The banded paper) is clearly to protect its own commercial interest.

19

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

What we missed?????Because of the involvement of Fire safety issues and by finding application of ASTM standards to set combustibility of cigarettes; a serious study and research on the possible behavioral changes and/or increased harmful consequences of increased frequency and deeper puffing of RIP was bypassed. Such committee on combustion has been called an “Expert Group” and thereby managed to divert the attention of the public health department and community from other possible consequences.

Subsequently all other States and Countries are following the New York example; which in itself had ignored all other aspects; except for the combustibility of the cigarettes. New York standards are being lifted from state-to-state and country-to-country without independent application of mind.

The Canadian Cigarette Ignition Propensity regulations have been brought by the Canadian Health Department by referring to the NY study. Health Canada adopted RIP despite the fact that NY study was done by fire-safety department and not the Health Department. Surprisingly the Canadian regulation read that “……..The Department of Health therefore believes it is in the interest of public health to take action to reduce the ignition propensity of cigarettes……….” This is a major slip.

The 2005 Health Canada Regulation (Cigarette Ignition Propensity Regulations) even specifically (in a way) promotes Phillip Morris and states “QUOTE” In July 2000, a major American cigarette manufacturer released a reduced-ignition propensity version of one of its cigarette brands in the United States. In April 2001, it released a reduced ignition propensity version ofthe same brand in New Zealand. This product is made with a patented paper which has concentric bands of ultra-thin paper applied on top of traditional cigarette paper. The manufacturer claims that "These bands or rings act as 'speed bumps' to slow down the rate at which the cigarette burns as the lit end crosses over them". When tested by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, these cigarettes were found to have a significantly reduced-ignition potential. “UNQUOTE”

20

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

The unanswered questions?How does the Mass Burn Rate (MBR) affect the Nicotine delivery of RIP cigarettes?

How does the porosity of the paper affect the puffing and other chemical constituents of RIP cigarettes?

Does RIP results in increased and deeper puffing?

Does such increased and deeper puffing/inhalation have any added adverse effect on the present smokers?

How does the banding in paper affect the Nicotine delivery?

Does RIP increase the overall “Nicotine Yield?”

Does the material used in banding of RIP affect the chemical delivery?

Does RIP increases the toxicity of cigarettes?

What are the commercial gains for the industry which patents the paper for this kind of cigarettes?

Does such patenting remove the smaller players from the market and increase the brand share of the existing big players?

21

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Understanding the deeper science

It is evident that MBR affects the Nicotine Delivery and helps the tobacco industry to engineer its products.

The change in design actually results in a better and more addictive product. Camouflaging it in the form of RIP gives it a legal sanction and reduces opposition.

It has been researched that “increasing trend was observed in all major market categories (mentholated vs non-mentholated, and full flavour vs light, medium (mild) or ultralight). Nicotine yield in smoke was positively associated with nicotine concentration in the tobacco and number of puffs per cigarette, both of which showed increasing trends between 1998 and 2005, i.e. during the study period. ”

Design modifications used to increase the addictiveness of cigarette can include techniques like varying the "filter and paper ventilation,“ “paper porosity,” “Paper Coating” and slowing the "burn rate," which allows more puffs per cigarette.

22

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

What is the real issue

Longevity of the industryA brand and patent warHaving a greater control over the marketEliminating smaller players and increasing the market shareAnticipating future trends and taking proactive actionUsing the knee-jerk reaction of tobacco-control and public-health community to gain strategic advantageBypassing Health Department and scienceUse of strategic games….which the public health and tobacco control community does not understand even as on date

23

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

A fraud on Public Health

This strategic bypassing of proper testing and still managing to slip along with a tacit consent of the public health community is the biggest fraud on science during the last two decades. This also shows that how vulnerable the scientific community can be to a well planned strategic approach of the tobacco industry.

It’s FOOD for THOUGHT

24

w w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gw w w . b u r n i n g b r a i n . o r gHemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

Let’s understand

There is more fire in this smoke

Hemant Goswami

hemant@burningbrain.org