[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 126 (Tuesday, August 1, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H8127-H8135]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                      TOBACCO AND AMERICA'S YOUTH

  [Additional statements to Mr. Waxman's testimony in the Record of 
Monday, July 31, 1995.]
                                                December 31, 1970.
     Dr. P.A. Eichorn.
     W.L. Dunn, Jr.
     Quarterly Report of Projects 1600 and 2302--October 1-
         December 31, 1970.


                             work completed

     Filter configuration preference
       Some 500 smokers were interviewed in the streets and places 
     of business of Richmond, Virginia. They were asked to rank 
     order as to preference five filter ends all of which differed 
     in appearance. One of the five was clearly the consistently 
     preferred design.
     Methods study
       Report written. Findings: (1) The position effect is of 
     such great magnitude as to possibly mask any real discerned 
     differences between two cigarettes. (2) Differences in 
     preference values between POL and SEF panelists were 
     articulated. (3) A possible deficiency in the Marlboro smoke 
     was isolated.

                                                                                                                

[[Page H8128]]
                             SERVICE VOLUME                             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Number of       Number of  
                                               tests         judgments  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Descriptive panel.......................              32             385
Other panels............................             150           8,614
Field tests completed...................               8           3,350
Field tests in progress.................              13           7,850
------------------------------------------------------------------------




                            work in progress

     Determinants of Menthol Cigarette Preference
       Data in process.
     Smoking and Heart Rate
       Report being typed.
     Anxiety and Cigarette Smoking
       Data collection completed. Analysis in process.
     Bird-I
       Computer problems have plagued the completion of this 
     study. There yet remain several computer runs before the 
     final report can be assembled.
     Project Carib
       Seventeen of 21 invitees have agreed to participate, one 
     has declined and three have yet to reply.
     Nicotine/tar Ratio Study
       We are initiating a study of the effect of systematic 
     variation of the nicotine/tar ratios upon smoking rate and 
     acceptability measures. Using the Marlboro as a base 
     cigarette, we will reduce the tar delivery incrementally by 
     filtration and increase the nicotine delivery incrementally 
     by adding a nicotine salt. All cigarettes will be smoked for 
     several days by each of a panel of 150 selected volunteers.
     Smoking and Low Delivery Cigarettes
       A study similar to the foregoing, but using a national 
     mailout panel and a wider range (5-20 mg) of tar delivery.
     Nicotine Discrimination Study
       Marboro type cigarettes with increments of nicotine salt 
     added were smoked on a handout basis by R&D volunteers. 
     Tentative results suggest that differences in nicotine levels 
     can be discriminated and then do influence acceptability 
     judgments. Report in progress.
                                                Philip Morris,

                                  Richmond, VA, September 8, 1971.


                      inter-office correspondence

     To: Dr. P. A. Eichorn.
     From: W. Dunn M. Johnston, F. Ryan, and T. Schori.
     Subject: Plans for 1972.
       1. We will concentrate upon the nicotine/tar ratio as a 
     factor in determining cigarettes acceptability. We have 
     established that tar nicotine levels ranged upwards from 
     current production the current production level of nicotine 
     is preferred. However the nicotine/tar ratio was not an 
     independent variable since the base tar delivery of 16 mg 
     increased absolutely with the increase of nicotine. 
     Subsequently we established that among combinations of three 
     levels of nicotine (1.2, 1.9, 2.2) and three levels of tar 
     (10, 16, 19) the low nicotine/high tar combination was 
     preferred. Note that the lowest nicotine level tested was the 
     current production level for flavorful filters. In a third 
     study which gave smokers the option of very low nicotine (0.3 
     mg) and production level nicotine (1.2 mg) with a constant 
     high tar delivery (24 mg), the preference was a function of 
     smoker variables, notably sex and brand smoked.
       Our plans now are to concentrate upon that nicotine 
     delivery range between 0.3 and 1.2 mg with a systematic 
     manipulation of the nicotine/tar ratio at incremental 
     nicotine levels within this range. The nicotine/tar ratio of 
     .07, which is characteristic of a broad range of natural 
     leaf, shall be taken as the mid-point of the ratio range. 
     Obviously we must segment our smoking population for 
     establishing optimum ratio levels.
       Cigarettes with the following parameters will be smoked to 
     determine optimal nicotine/tar regulations for cigarette 
     acceptability of relatively low delivery cigarettes.
       [Chart omitted.]
       Also, using the low nicotine tobacco (.3 mg nicotine) and 
     air dilution or filtration techniques, the following low 
     nicotine cigarettes will be evaluated in terms of their 
     acceptability, first in local then, where indicated, national 
     testing:
       1. 18, 12, 5 mg tar vs. Marlboro
       2. 18, 12, 5 mg tar vs. Kent
       3. 18, 12, 5 mg tar vs. Cigarette gold
       2. We plan to investigate the relationship between socio-
     economic status and smoking behavior in terms of whether or 
     not the panelist smokes, type and brand smoked, quantity 
     smoked, and changes over time in brand and quantity smoked.
       We will: investigate relations between Status Inconsistency 
     and Personality Characteristics; and look for SES relations 
     in differences between smokers and nonsmokers which have been 
     attributed to smoking.
       3. Continuing an ongoing program in economic analyses, we 
     plan to:
       a. Keep management apprised of the trends of tar and 
     nicotine deliveries of cigarettes on the market by continuing 
     to provide a regulate quarterly report and analysis of 
     weighted average tar and nicotine deliveries.
       b. Provide economic forecast and information as guidance to 
     the corporation by continuing the annual contribution to the 
     Philip Morris U.S.A. Five-Year Plan.
       c. Provide economic information, principally for R&D and 
     New York Marketing and Financial management, on selected 
     economic aspects of cigarettes and their sales, through the 
     study of such topics as:
       1. the elasticity of demand for cigarettes
       2. the impact of a value-added tax
       3. switching patterns
       4. brand image
       4. We plan to complete our study of difference thresholds 
     for RTO and menthol. In these studies we are looking for the 
     just-noticeable differences which smokers can detect in these 
     parameters.
       5. We plan to study the relationship between Sustained 
     Performance and Smoking:
       1. On-the-job situation--Actual or simulated job situations 
     will be used to study the effect of smoking on worker 
     productivity.
       b. Driver Fatigue--The effect of smoking on driving 
     performance will be evaluated in an actual 8-10 hour driving 
     task.
       6. We plan to systematically observe puffing patterns 
     across different cigarettes using portable recorders being 
     developed by Engineering in order to:
       a. Find standard puff profiles of a restricted group of 
     smokers while working at their desks, smoking preferred 
     cigarettes.
       b. Find how standard puff profiles of this group are 
     changed when cigarette characteristics are changed (e.g. 
     switch Multifilter smokers to Marlboros, Marlboro smokers to 
     Multifilters).
       7. We plan to hold the conference on Motivational 
     Mechanisms in Cigarette Smoking in January, 1972, and publish 
     the proceedings as expeditiously as possible. Two papers from 
     Philip Morris R&D will be included.
       8. Major strides have been made in maximizing computer 
     usage in conducting our national field test program in terms 
     of roster maintenance, panel selection, data processing and 
     reporting. During the forthcoming year we shall concentrate 
     on rebuilding the roster by eliminating inactives and 
     recruiting new members. The program whose objective is to 
     determine the relationship between emotional state and 
     smoking will be aggressively pursued during the forthcoming 
     year. We intend to:
       1. Further investigate relation between personality test 
     scores and predicted puff rates among college students, e.g. 
     anxiety and puff rate;
       2. Expand shock-anxiety program to include other noxious 
     stimuli, e.g. loud noises.
       3. Expand dependent variables measured to include puff 
     volume.
       9. As a follow-up upon the demonstration of the preference 
     justification effect as a contaminating variable in our 
     current field test procedures, we plan to actively explore 
     other field tests formats which would minimize the preference 
     justification effect. Two such candidates have already been 
     developed and will be tested within the next quarter.
       10. If the trend of the past 15 years continues, it will be 
     necessary to progressively reduce the tar delivery of our 
     marketed brands in the future. Anticipating this need, we 
     plan to address ourselves to the problem of determining the 
     optimum way, among the multiple possible ways, of reducing 
     the tar delivery of a cigarette.
     Charge number: 1600.
     Program title: Consumer Psychology.
     Period covered: December 16-January 15, 1972.

     Project title: Psychology of Smoking.
     Project leader: W.L. Dunn, Jr.
       The Conference on Motivation in Cigarette Smoking was held 
     January 12-16 St. Martin. Work has now begun on publishing 
     the proceedings of the conference.

     Project title: Perceived Cigarette Attributes.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       This is a national mailout study designed to determine the 
     major cigarette characteristics as perceived by the smoker. 
     Ballots will go out shortly.

     Project title: A Comparison of the Effects of Caffeine and 
         Cigarette Smoking.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       This study was designed to compare the relative effects of 
     caffeine and cigarette smoking on several indices of arousal 
     in smokers. Smokers were tested under each of three 
     conditions: smoking, caffine, and placebo. Automated data 
     acquisition was employed. Data analysis will commence 
     shortly.

     Project title: Smoking and Low Delivery Cigarettes.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       Our specially grown low nicotine-high tar tobacco has 
     arrived.
       Low delivery cigarettes with varying tar and nicotine 
     deliveries are being made with both the low nicotine tobacco 
     and with ordinary tobacco. These cigarettes will be used in 
     national mailouts to determine what combinations of tar and 
     nicotine make for optimal acceptability in a low delivery 
     cigarette.

     Project title: Smoking and Low Delivery Cigarettes.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       Several attempts have been made to produce cigarettes for a 
     national mailout. Some difficulties have been encountered in 
     achieving desired tar and nicotine levels.

     Project title: TPM Difference Limens.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       In this study we are attempting to determine what 
     constitutes a just noticeable difference in cigarette TPM. 
     Cigarettes at five different delivery levels will be sent to 
     panelists in the field. Previously, rather unsuccessfully, we 
     had taken a laboratory approach to this same problem.

     Project title: Personality Revisited.
     Project leader: T.R. Schori.
       Our Tar, Nicotine, and Smoking Behavior Study disclosed 
     some interesting relationships between various indices of 
     smoking and 

[[Page H8129]]
     personality. We therefore tested students at two colleges to see 
     whether our findings might be more general. Those data are 
     commencing to come in.
                                                  October 5, 1972.
     Dr. P.A. Eichorn.
     W.L. Dunn, Jr.
     Quarterly Report--Projects 1600 and 2302.


                                Sex-III

       Twelve hundred of the original 2400 filter smokers who 
     participated in the SEX-I study in 1968 are, at the time of 
     this writing, saying butts for R&D analysis. We will be 
     attempting to relate change in smoke intake to other 
     variables, notably change in available TPM, in the cigarette 
     smoked.
     Publication of smoking behavior: Motives and Incentives
       Because of editing difficulties with one author, the volume 
     is now likely to be delayed until January, 1973.
     Participation in Food Motors Keep-Well Campaign
       The Medical Department of Ford Motor Co. will be launching 
     an exploratory study of a Prophylactic Program to Reduce 
     Cardiovascular Illness among Employees. We will collaborate 
     in the design and data collection. The study is in the early 
     planning stage.
     Miller Brewing
       We are providing ongoing consultation and testing services 
     to this subsidiary in the evaluation of its beer products.
     The Schachter Studies
       We are collaborating closely with this investigator and 
     providing technical support to the research activities in the 
     Psychology Dept. of Columbia University. A significant 
     theoretical contribution to the understanding of cigarette 
     smoking is believed imminent from this effort.
     Puffing Behavior
       We have begun gathering puffing data among student college 
     smoking various brands of cigarettes and little cigars. 
     Intake variables (puff frequency, interpuffing intervals, 
     puff volume, etc.) should prove related to product 
     preferences, FTC tar and nicotine delivery, etc. The human 
     smoking recorder is used to monitor the puffing while 
     subjects watch slides.
     Personality and Puffing
       We continue to observe differences in puffing behavior 
     related to personality variables. The effect seems clearer 
     among male subjects that among females.
     Shock and Smoking
       Data collection will resume in October at a new location 
     (POL). We need to develop a different stressor as fear of 
     shock is scaring away some of our more valuable subjects.
     Sustained performance and smoking
       In this two-part study, we are evaluating psychomotor 
     performance of smokers, deprived smokers, and nonsmokers over 
     time (3 hours). Part 1, concerned with complex task 
     performance, has been completed. The subject's task consisted 
     of five subtasks which had to be performed simultaneously. 
     These subtasks were: a meter monitoring subtask (6 meters), a 
     light monitoring subtask (4 lights), a visual choice reaction 
     time subtasks, an auditory choice reaction time subtask, and 
     a mental arithmetic subtask.
       In terms of all five subtasks, the subjects showed 
     significant improvements in performance over time. No 
     significant differences in performance were found between the 
     three smoking conditions except in the auditory subtask where 
     smokers displayed the best performance. This latter finding 
     suggests the possibility that smoking enhances auditory 
     sensitivity and we are currently looking into this 
     possibility. As we had found in previous studies, smokers had 
     fewer significant mood changes (as measured by the Nowlis 
     Mood Scale--a paper and pencil device to measure transient 
     mood states) than did nonsmokers or deprived smokers. This 
     suggests that smokers are more emotionally stable in this 
     sort of test situation than are nonsmokers or deprived 
     smokers.
     Multiple Discriminant Analysis: A Repeated Measures Design, 
         Virginia Journal of Science, 23, 62-63, Summer, 1972. 
         Schori, T.R., and Tindall, J.E.
       Menthol Cigarette Studies
       Two menthol cigarette studies are underway. The first is 
     designed to delineate the images possessed by various of the 
     menthol cigarettes currently on the market. This is a 
     questionnaire type study using national roster panelists.
       The second type is a smoking test. It is designed to 
     identify nicotine and menthol parameters which make for 
     optimal acceptability of menthol cigarettes. This study has a 
     three-stage design. The first stage is designed to identify 
     those nicotine delivery levels which we might reasonably wish 
     to consider for menthol cigarettes. Having identified these 
     nicotine delivery levels, in stage 2 we will determine 
     combinations of nicotine and menthol which make for optimal 
     acceptability. And then in stage 3, cigarettes with these 
     combinations will be tested against current brands of known 
     quality and sales potential.
       Bay Area Study
       Marketing, for the past few months, has been trying to 
     improve the image of Multifilter in the San Francisco Bay 
     Area and San Jose. In this study, we are trying to determine 
     whether this attempt to improve Multifilter's image has been 
     successful. We are doing this by means of a mailout to 
     smokers in these areas.
       Tar and Nicotine Studies
       We have done a number of nicotine to tar ratio studies. 
     Development is continuing to try to make cigarette models 
     with various levels of tar and nicotine using our low 
     nicotine tobacco. When we get successful models, we will go 
     out to a national panel in an attempt to determine 
     combinations of tar and nicotine which make for optimal 
     acceptability.
       In addition, a local panel of smokers will test these 
     cigarettes for nine weeks in order to determine the effect of 
     tar and nicotine on cigarette consumption when both tar and 
     nicotine deviate downward from that to which the smokers are 
     accustomed. This is a follow-up of TNT-1.
                                                Philip Morris,

                                  Richmond, VA, November 14, 1972.


                      INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

     To: Dr. P.A. Eichorn.
     From: W.L. Dunn.
     Subject: 1600 objectives for 1973.
       Objective I: To provide leads for new cigarette design and 
     development.
       A number of studies are planned or in progress which fall 
     under this objective. Each study is concerned with some 
     discrete aspect of the cigarette or smoke product idea that 
     demands data for its evaluation. A brief description of each 
     follows:
     Nicotine/tar ratio
       The nicotine/tar ratio of all cigarettes of natural leaf is 
     .07  .01. We have no acceptability data for 
     nicotine/tar ratios outside this range. Since the trend in 
     tar delivery is downward, and since nicotine is presumed to 
     be that which is sought by the smoke does a cigarette with a 
     high nicotine/tar ratio have market potential. Three studies 
     of this question were executed in 1972. The critical study is 
     yet to be accomplished; namely, the evaluation of that matrix 
     of nine cigarettes representing all combinations of three 
     nicotine levels (.3, .8 and 1.2 mg) and three tar levels, (8, 
     12 and 16 mg). This study will be done in 1973.
     Nicotine and menthol level variations in menthol cigarettes
       What is the optimum combination of nicotine and menthol 
     levels? In a manner similar to that used in the nicotine/tar 
     ratio series, we will obtain smoker preference response to a 
     matrix of cigarettes varying in menthol and nicotine levels, 
     using black menthol smokers as principal panelists.
     Optimum mode of tar reduction
       Given that the market demands a 14 mg cigarette, and given 
     a variety of ways to reduce delivery to this level, which way 
     provides the most acceptable cigarette? This study has been 
     in the making for a year. The problem is to obtain cigarettes 
     at target delivery representing each of the reduction modes. 
     Once the cigarettes can be provided, we will execute the 
     study .
     The influence of RTD on acceptability
       In recent studies of the nicotine/tar ratio we have 
     observed an effect on preference attributable to differences 
     in RTD, RTD being a variable which we were unable to 
     adequately control. We plan to conduct a preference study 
     with cigarettes representing systematic manipulation of RTD. 
     The study is contingent upon obtaining the required 
     cigarettes, there being technical problems involved in 
     attempting to vary RTD independently of other factors.
     Puffing patterns as a function of cigarette characteristics
       To what extent do cigarette parameters (tar, nicotine, RTD, 
     rod length, etc.) influence puffing patterns? This is a 
     problem that has long interested development. Several years 
     have been devoted to the development of a device for 
     recording puffing patterns. The device is now available 
     (though falling considerably short of the original 
     specifications) and observations of puffing patterns are now 
     in progress. We expect to report some findings in 1973.
     SEX-III
       This study has been executed. The report is scheduled for 
     early 1973. It is a replication of SEX-I (1968) using 1200 of 
     the original 2500 subjects of SEX-I. We will relate changes 
     in mean daily intake to a number of variables, with 
     particular interest in the influence of changes in available 
     tar upon intake.
       Objective II: To further our understanding of the motives 
     and incentives in cigarette smoking
       That there are many rewards in cigarette smoking is a basic 
     premise in our research aimed at explaining cigarette 
     smoking. But some rewards we believe to be more crucial than 
     others. Our program is aimed at identifying the crucial or 
     primary reward(s), i.e. the reward(s) which, if eliminated, 
     would lead to the discontinuation of smoking.
       A second basic premise is that some people find smoking 
     more rewarding than others because of certain yet to be 
     isolated physiological or psychological characteristics. A 
     third premise is that these characteristics are of such a 
     nature as to make smoking rewarding under not all situations 
     but only those which induce deviation in the individual's 
     psychological state. Thus, smoking is rewarding for certain 
     people under certain circumstances. Our tasks, then, is to 
     identify the significant characteristic of the smoker and the 
     significant elements of the situation and to state how the 
     critical variables of the 

[[Page H8130]]
     person and the situation interact to reinforce the smoking act. The 
     following are discrete projects which share this common 
     objective.
     Telemetered heart rate
       A psychological characteristic which is of interest to us 
     is ``arousal level'' referring to a hypothetical state of 
     activity in the central nervous system. Heart rate is taken 
     to be an index of arousal level. We will sample heart rate 
     via telemetered radio signal over the course of a working day 
     under smoking and abstention conditions. Instrumentation 
     limitations and the difficulty of obtaining subjects that are 
     willing to abstain on demand over several weeks time compel 
     us to focus on a few subjects and extensive observations per 
     subject.
       We are hypothesizing from a theoretical model that 
     variability in heart rate will be lower under smoking than 
     under abstention conditions.
     Personality and puffing behavior
       In this research we observe the differences in puffing 
     behavior under relatively nonstressed situations (subjects 
     evaluate the difficulty of choosing between two stimuli and 
     later actually make the choices) of people with different 
     personality characteristics. We then attempt to predict their 
     puffing behavior from knowledge of their personality types.
       Evidence to date suggests that students with a high type V 
     score, determined by a composite 11 of the 20 factors 
     measured by the 16 PF, take many more puffs on cigarettes 
     than do students with a low type V score. Students with 
     intermediate scores take an intermediate number of puffs.
       Plans for the year: (1) Extend our observations to other 
     puff variables by using the smoking recorder. (These 
     observations can be embedded in other data-gathering tasks, 
     such as those of the project examining effects of product 
     differences on smoking behavior.) (2) Improve our prediction 
     accuracy by increasing the number and type of personality 
     test items in our tests. (We'll give both the A and B forms 
     of the 16 PF, add items from the Maudsley scale, and 
     administer a portion of an intelligence test.) (3) Seek out 
     specific personality combinations which affect the new 
     dependent variables. (d) Extend our interest to the 
     prediction of FTC tar taken into the mouth by our local and 
     national panelists by relating their daily intake and average 
     intake per cigarette to their personality.
     Anxiety and puffing behavior
       In this project we will repeat an investigation conducted 
     earlier which suggests that subjects threatened by shock will 
     show differential heart rate increases associated with the 
     threat on days when they are allowed to smoke than on days 
     when they are not allowed to smoke. Our observations require 
     confirmation before we are ready to publish the results.
     Personality and social class
       Our measure of social class is that of the U.S. Census, 
     which has rated various occupations along a 99 point scale. 
     We will select a set of sample panelists from different 
     levels of the socioeconomic spectrum and compare their 
     cigarette consumption with their social class and personality 
     type. In addition to the general level of class, a factor we 
     postulate as important in determining consumption is the 
     relative consistency of a man's educational background, 
     salary, and his occupation. We reason that where these 
     factors are not appropriately consistent--so that the man may 
     be under or overtrained for his occupation, or may be under 
     or overpaid for his occupation we might expect him to be 
     operating under such stresses as would (a) affect his 
     personality test scores and (b) increase the likelihood of 
     him becoming a smoker.
     Effects of product differences on smoking behavior
       This project is an offshoot of the theoretical research 
     into states and traits which uncover differences in smoking 
     behavior associated with differences in people. It examines 
     differences in smoking behavior associated with differences 
     in smoking material.
       Procedures: Smoking behavior is monitored while smokers 
     engage in a simple psychological task repeated over a series 
     of days, during which they smoke two samples of each of eight 
     products: two little cigars (Winchester, and Antonio and 
     Cleopatra) and 6 85mm cigarettes (Marlboro, Winston, 
     Multifilter, Kool, True, and Carlton). An additional two 
     samples of four products are also smoked during a slightly 
     more difficult task on the same days. Number of puffs per 
     cigarette and interval between puffs are monitored both by an 
     observer and by the desk model of the smoking recorder, which 
     also records puff volume and maximum flow rate.
       Expectation: The puff variables will be affected by (1) Tar 
     and nicotine deliveries of the products and (2) General taste 
     acceptability of the products as measured on a rating scale.
       Estimated Completion: Depending on the availability of 
     subjects during December and early January, when the 
     University has a long vacation for the first time, data 
     collection should end in March and a report should be 
     published in April, 1973.
       Comment: In the expectation that further projects of this 
     character will be called for, we have devised a new task to 
     occupy the smoker's attention. The task, which involves the 
     comparison of artificially designed words called paralods 
     with other words seen before, should be repeatable on many 
     more occasions than is our present task. This should make it 
     easier for us to make repeated observations on the same 
     smokers and partly alleviate one of our major hangups, 
     finding a constant supply of new smokers for our research 
     activities.
     Film-induced stress
       Heart rate, respiration rate, galvanic skin response and 
     muscle potential will be recorded for all subjects as they 
     watch a neutral film. All subjects (nonsmokers, deprived 
     smokers and smokers) will be deprived during the neutral film 
     and for at least an hour preceding the film. Then two stress 
     films will be shown. During this time only the smoking group 
     will be permitted to smoke and the physiological measures 
     will again be recorded. Mood scales will also be given at 
     several points during the experiment. We will be looking for 
     possible differences between groups in terms of physiological 
     and/or mood changes. This will be an attempt to determine if 
     smoking can affect the ability to handle stress.
     Spare mental capacity
       In this experiment nonsmokers, smokers deprived, and 
     smokers will first be required to perform a tracking task. On 
     the basis of their performance on the tracking task, they 
     will be given varying amounts of other tasks to perform. The 
     better a subject performs, the more he will be given to do. 
     The object is to push every subject to his limit and 
     determine whether there are any differences between groups in 
     amount of spare mental capacity.
     Sustained performance
       We will analyze the data collected in two different types 
     of sustained performance tasks. The first task was extremely 
     difficult and required the subject to use a great deal of his 
     mental capacity. The second was a slower (one quarter the 
     speed) version of the first and was designed to bore the 
     subjects. We will look for differential effects of smoking 
     condition (nonsmoker, smoker deprived, and smoker) and task 
     difficulty on performance and on two different mood scales.
     Driving efficiency and smoking
       This effort is in its germanal stage. We are thinking about 
     the feasibility of a heavy commitment of time and money to an 
     extensive monitoring of the automobile driver aimed at 
     determining whether smoking does affect performance. Our 
     plans to date go only so far as to include a literature 
     search and a possible proposed writeup.
       Objective III: To Provide Economic Analyses and Forecasts 
     to R&D and New York Management, as follows:
       Keep management appraised of the trends in tar and nicotine 
     deliveries of cigarettes on the American market by continuing 
     to provide periodic reports and analyses of weighted average 
     tar and nicotine deliveries.
       Provide economic forecast and analysis of the effect of 
     demographic and social trends as guidance to the corporation 
     through the annual contribution to the P.M. USA Five-Year 
     Plan, and in answer to specific questions posed by R&O and 
     New York Marketing and Financial Management regarding foreign 
     and domestic economic, social and demograhic trends.
       Provide, through the medium of the data bank developed in 
     successive pollings of the POL National Roster, information 
     to R&O and to New York Marketing Management on the 
     demographic and socio-economic characteristics of users of 
     products of interest to Philip Morris; brand and flavor 
     preferences and extent of usage as related to demographic and 
     socio-economic characteristics; and changes over time in 
     brand and flavor preferences and extent of use of cohorts of 
     our panelists.
       Objective IV: To Maintain and Where Necessary Upgrade our 
     Capability for Providing Consumer Product Testing Services
       Toward this end we plan to do the following:
     Establish a local panel of black menthol smokers
       Via advertisement in the local newspaper, Afro-American, we 
     are recruiting a mail-out, phone-back panel of black menthol 
     smokers.
     Establish a national roster of black smokers
       We will select appropriate city areas from city directories 
     and draw names for mail invitations to join the POL panel. We 
     will target for an urban sample of a thousand smokers; which 
     should include 300 menthol smokers.
     Annual (semi-annual?) dinner for R&O booth panelists with 
         high attendance records
       We plan to institute this program to encourage more regular 
     participation. An annual dinner for the Descriptive Panel has 
     proven most effective.
     A bastard descriptive panel/booth test procedure
       We are in the process of evaluating an alternative 
     procedure for in-house product testing suggested by the 
     Stanford Research Institute. It combines certain of the 
     Descriptive Panel principles with those of booth testing.
             Philip Morris U.S.A.--Research and Development


                        five year plan--1974-78

                               May, 1973

     Overall objective
       To support the growth goals of PM-USA, R&D management will 
     strive to maintain the rate of balanced technical progress 
     consistent with our industry leadership position. Substantial 
     effort will be channeled into major product and process 
     programs in 

[[Page H8131]]
     selected areas of greatest opportunity, while building the level of 
     technical support and biological investigation needed to 
     protect established domestic and international product 
     positions.
     I. New product and product improvement programs
       R&D management strategy in the area of new products and 
     product improvement will be to seek to anticipate the changes 
     in cigaret design, construction or composition which will 
     constitute readily-perceivable advances over present market 
     brands, and to develop the technology needed to accomplish 
     those changes.
       A. Filters and filtration
       The major filter effort is being directed toward 
     understanding fundamental filtration mechanisms and providing 
     a solid foundation of filter technology upon which to base 
     future products. The program includes selective filtration of 
     various smoke components, sorbtion and flow studies, 
     controlled release of flavors, and analysis of the 
     functioning of diverse filter material candidates.
       Filter process development activities include plug 
     combining through extrusion, space-fill techniques, and the 
     single flush-fluted filter.
       New filter products under current development include 
     foamed plastic filters, impaction filters, fused CA, spiral 
     filter, and porous polymeric filters.
       B. Smoke composition and control
       This long-range program is aimed at developing economical 
     proprietary techniques for control of those specific smoke 
     components which may come to be regarded as undesirable. 
     Achievement of the objection will necessitate identification 
     of the rod precursors of smoke constituents, understanding 
     the conditions under which the constituents are formed, and 
     developing techniques to alter the precursors and/or reaction 
     conditions beneficially.
       C. Non-tobacco fillers and additives
       The principal elements of this program are the designed 
     filler project and its supporting studies, evaluation of 
     competitive non-tobacco sheet materials, tobacco protein 
     concentrates, and the synthesis of analogs of tobacco 
     alkaloids.
       D. Flavor and subjective response
       Our long range effort is aimed at a dramatic reduction in 
     both nicotine and tar while maintaining subjective responses 
     equal to our present major brands. This complex task will 
     require (1) understanding more thoroughly the constituents of 
     smoke, (2) discovering which constituents contribute 
     positively to the smoker's response, and which detract or 
     make no contribution, (3) determining those precursor 
     substances in the filler and paper and those pyrolysis 
     conditions which produce each type of constituent, and (4) 
     developing means of decreasing the proportion of undesirable 
     constituents, increasing the desirable ones, or supplementing 
     them with additives.
       E. Other new product concepts
       Other new product models under current development include 
     a slim cigaret formulated for a strong masculine appeal, a 
     low delivery slim, and a paper-free, film-wrapped cigaret 
     rod.
     II. Psychological and biological aspects of smoking
       R&D management will continue to emphasize three areas of 
     investigation which are relatively long-term with respect to 
     commercial applications: (A) Smoker Motives and Behavior, (B) 
     Bioassay Methods, and (C) Physiological Effects of Smoking.
       A. Smoker motives and behavior
       This program comprises a number of studies expected to 
     provide insight leading to new cigaret designs. These include 
     studies of optimum nicotine/tar ratios, nicotine/menthol 
     relationships, puffing patterns as a function of cigaret 
     characteristics, influence of RTD on acceptability, 
     personality and anxiety factors affecting puffing behavior, 
     and effects of product differences on smoking behavior.
       B. Bioassay methods
       In order to remain abreast of, and when possible 
     anticipate, trends and findings in smoking and health, R&D 
     will continue to develop and apply rapid bioassay methods to 
     evaluate the effects of cigaret smoke and its constituents 
     upon biological systems.
       C. Physiological effects of Smoking
       An increased level of effort is anticipated, both 
     domestically and abroad, on the physiological effects of our 
     smoking products. R&D management recognizes the importance to 
     the Corporation of a rapid, informed response to challenges 
     in the health field, and will seek to establish a level of 
     preparedness commensurate with an industry leadership 
     position.
                                                 October 29, 1973.
     Those listed.
     T.S. Osdene.
     5-Year plan.

       Attached is a copy of the R&D Strategy 5-Year Plan. I would 
     be pleased if you would use this as a framework in which your 
     various programs and projects are supportive of this 
     document. In the near future you will be given your Project 
     Authorization sheets, and I would be pleased to receive your 
     plans within the next two weeks. Should you wish to discuss 
     this with me in some detail, please let me know.
       If in your opinion, there have been any omissions or 
     mistakes within the broad R&D outline, please let me know so 
     that we can amend.
       Dr. W.L. Dunn
       Dr. D.A. Lowitz
       Dr. F. Will

                          R&D Strategy Outline


                    i. support of established brands

     A. General strategy
       R&D management believes that the technical support of our 
     established successful cigaret brands is the foundation upon 
     which any future growth through new brands must be built. 
     Therefore, established product and profit positions will be 
     protected through a balanced program in the areas of cost 
     savings, smoking and health, brand improvement, and service 
     to other departments.
     B. Cost savings
       Primary emphasis will be on development of the leaf, stem 
     and sheet processing technology needed to achieve the lowest 
     possible materials cost for PM-USA without jeopardizing the 
     reputation for consistently high quality which our cigarets 
     enjoy.
       Secondarily, R&D will be alert to possible economies in 
     other phases of cigaret manufacturing.
     C. Smoking and health
       R&D will seek to establish a level of knowledge and 
     preparedness which will facilitate a rapid, informed response 
     to challenges in the health field. This level will be 
     developed largely through the sponsorship of selected studies 
     at independent laboratories and universities. The principal 
     in-house effort will be the development and application of 
     rapid bioassay methods to evaluate the effects of cigaret 
     smoke and its constituents upon biological systems.
     D. Improvement or established brands
       To the extent that opportunities or needs for technical 
     improvement of established PM market brands may occasionally 
     become evident, whether through new technology developed by 
     R&D or by suppliers, through continuing R&D liaison with 
     Marketing or Manufacturing, or through competitor actions, 
     R&D will provide the technical support as needed to 
     accomplish the improvements.
     E. Technical service to other departments
       Services to other PM departments will be mainly confined to 
     complying with special project requests and continuing to 
     provide established routine services such as the CI report, 
     analytical support for HTI tests, etc. An important 
     exception, however, will be service to the International 
     Division, for whom R&D aggressively will seek to make 
     available its technology and resources to support the 
     continued rapid growth of that Division.
                            ii. new products

     A. General Strategy
       R&D management believes that, because of the broadcast, 
     advertising ban and other changes in the structure of the 
     cigaret market, new brands based on relatively modest product 
     differences can no longer be introduced successfully. The few 
     successful new brands in the foreseeable future mainly will 
     be those which embody major, readily-perceivable advances 
     over existing market brands.
       Recognizing that the most innovative and promising cigaret 
     concepts for the long run will require a depth of 
     understanding of our product and customer which we have not 
     yet attained and which can only be achieved through 
     substantial investments in directed research, R&D management 
     will concentrate a large part of the resources at its 
     disposal in two major long-range new product programs: a 
     cigaret with controlled-composition mainstream smoke, and a 
     ``full-flavor'' cigaret delivering less than ten milligrams 
     of FTC tar.
     B. Composition control of mainstream smoke
       This program is aimed at developing economical proprietary 
     techniques for control of those specific smoke components 
     which may come to be regarded as undesirable. The program 
     will include projects to identify the rod precursors of 
     unwanted smoke constituents, to understand the conditions 
     under which the constituents are formed, and to develop 
     techniques to eliminate selectively the unwanted constituents 
     from the smoke, either by altering the precursors and/or 
     reaction conditions, or by removing the constituent after it 
     is formed (principally by filtration).
     C. Full-flavor/low delivery
       This program is directed at a dramatic reduction in cigaret 
     tar level while maintaining subjective responses equal to our 
     present major brands, and is in several important ways, the 
     complement of the program described above. As the Composition 
     Control effort seeks to ``eliminate the negative,'' this 
     program is to ``accentuate the positive.'' The task requires 
     (1) understanding more thoroughly the constituents of smoke, 
     (2) discovering which constituents contribute positively to 
     the smoker's response, and which detract or make no 
     contribution, (3) determining those precursor substances in 
     the filler and paper and those pyrolysis conditions which 
     produce each type of constituent, and (4) developing means of 
     increasing the relative concentration of desirable 
     constituents.
     D. Other new product technology
       R&D management recognizes that, despite the importance of 
     the two new product programs described above, these alone 
     will not 

[[Page H8132]]
     provide sufficient breadth of technology to enable the Company to 
     become the undisputed industry leader by 1980.
       [1.] Accordingly, additional programs will be maintained 
     with two broad objectives:
       [2.] To develop cigaret features and processes which can 
     find application in a possible new brand, although the 
     features and processes may not be sufficient justification by 
     themselves for a new brand or brand extension.
       To improve our understanding of how and why smokers 
     actually smoke cigarets, to provide leads for other major new 
     product concepts.
       Strategically, R&D management wishes to maintain a large 
     number of projects of these two types, sufficiently diverse 
     to cover all of the important elements of the product and its 
     use. Although the projects in the aggregate will represent a 
     major investment of R&D resources, the expenditure level on 
     any single project will be relatively low.
     Charge number: 1600.
     Program title: Smoker Psychology.
     Project leader: W.L. Dunn, Jr.
     Period covered: April 1-30, 1974.
     Date of report: May 9, 1974.

     Project title: Aloha Brain Waves and Smoking.
     Written by: W.L. Dunn.
       Nearing completion of data collection.
     Project title: Controlling Smoke Inhalation Post-Puff.
     Written by: W.L. Dunn.
       Still in instrumentation phase.
     Project title: Puffing Behavior.
     Written by: F.J. Ryan.
       When 16 students smoked 85 mm Marlboros or Salems cut to 
     different lengths, we observed that (1) first puffs were 
     strikingly similar in volume, flow, and duration, whether 
     taken on an 85, 78, 71, 65, or 59 mm rod; (2) second puffs 
     were strikingly similar, too, whether at 78, 71, 65, 59, or 
     52 mm; (3) later-than-second puffs had volumes which were 
     determined by rod length, rather than puff number. In this 
     study puffs were taken at 60-second intervals. But smokers 
     are normally free to take puffs at any time, so that it is 
     inappropriate to use puff number alone to categorize volumes. 
     A third puff taken when an 85 mm rod is 71 mm long will have 
     a different volume than a third puff taken when a rod is 40 
     mm long. Interpuff interval and static burn rate must be 
     taken into account.
       Some summarizing and grouping of the data in several recent 
     studies suggests that puff volume is dependent on the weight 
     of the smoker. Our nine heaviest student smokers had 
     considerably larger volumes per puff than our nine lighter 
     smokers. Most of the volume increase is attributable to 
     differences in flow rate, but there are differences in puff 
     duration, too. Whether this is due to general strength and 
     vigor, to generally greater appetite, to lung capacity, or to 
     some other factor is unknown. If we take smoke volume per 
     puff, body weight, and puff by puff tar and nicotine 
     deliveries into account, finding mg tar (or nicotine) per 
     puff per kg of body weight--then the group differences 
     disappear.
       This suggests some type of dose hypothesis in controlling 
     smoke volume intake.
     Project title: Smoking, Arousal, and Mood Change.
     Written by: T.R. Schori.
       Data collection continues. We had hoped to be able to 
     obtain good heart rate data using a cassette-type recording 
     system. That now seems unlikely based upon the many 
     difficulties we have experienced with that system. However, 
     these data are only a nonessential minor part of this study.
     Project title: Miscellaneous.
     Written by: T.R. Schori.
       SEF is nearly ready to go out with an RP\3\ test of our DL-
     2 cigarettes. One of the menthol cigarettes for MN-3 is being 
     remade.
     Project title: Regression Analysis.
     Written by: T.R. Schori.
       Having done a number of studies (JND-1, JND-2, TNT-3, TNT-
     4) in which we have systematically manipulated tar and 
     nicotine parameters of cigarettes, we are trying to see if we 
     can make any overall conclusion. Specifically, we are trying 
     to predict nicotine/tar ratios for optimal cigarette 
     acceptability at differing tar deliveries.
                                             Philip Morris U.S.A.,


                                              Research Center,

                                                     October 1995.
     Report Title: Low Delivery Cigarettes and Increased Nicotine/
         Tar Ratios, A Replication.
     Written by: Barbara Jones, Willie Houck, Peggy Martin.
     Approved by: William L. Dunn, Jr. and Leo F. Meyer.
     Distribution: H. Wakeham, F. Resnik, T. Osdene, R. Thomson, 
         W. Gannon, R. Fagan, F. Daylor, J. Osmalov, H. Daniel, W. 
         Claflin, P. Gauvin, M. Johnston, F. Ryan, C. Levy, F. 
         Reynolds, Indexer Day File (2), Central File (2).

                                Abstract

       This study provides evidence that the optimum nicotine to 
     tar (N/T) ratio for a 10 mg tar cigarette is somewhat higher 
     than that occurring in smoke from the natural state of 
     tobacco, namely, .07.01.
       Three low delivery cigarettes (10 mg tar) differing in 
     terms of N/T ratio (.06, .09 and .12) were rated in terms of 
     subjective strength and acceptability by 235 regular filter 
     smokers. Two packs of each were provided each respondent plus 
     two packs of a control Marlboro.
       The .09 N/T ratio experimental cigarette was equal in 
     acceptability to the Marlboro control. The .06 and .12 N/T 
     ratio cigarettes were both judged less acceptable.
       All four cigarettes were judged to be different from one 
     another in terms of strength in the following ascending 
     order: .06, .09, control, .12.
       One can infer from these results that nicotine does 
     contribute to the perceived strength of cigarette smoke, and 
     that the optimum N/T ratio for a 10 mg tar cigarette is 
     somewhat higher than that occurring in smoke from the natural 
     state of tobacco, namely, .07.01.
       We plan to use these finding as guidelines in conducting 
     another N/T ratio study using the National POL panel.


                              introduction

       It appears that aims of research in the area of low 
     delivery cigarettes need to be twofold. One goal is to come 
     up with a low delivery cigarette that will appeal to current 
     low delivery cigarette smokers. It seems logical that such a 
     cigarette can look like a low delivery cigarette, i.e., 
     possibly having unconventional tipping paper and an unusual 
     appearing filter. It may even be suggested that a cigarette 
     will be acceptable to many current low delivery smokers only 
     if it has the taste characteristics that they associate with 
     a ``healthy cigarette'' e.g. low in flavor, strength and 
     impact. One study (Schori, 1972) indicated that a large 
     national sample of smokers did not perceive any cigarette 
     then on the market as being low in delivery and high in 
     flavor.
       Another objective, providing the impetus behind the present 
     study, is the development of a low delivery cigarette that 
     will both look and taste like a regular filter cigarette and 
     thus will appeal to current regular filter smokers. The idea 
     behind this is that some of these smokers would possibly 
     smoke a low delivery cigarette but they consider the low 
     delivery cigarettes currently on the market as too 
     flavorless, too weak and too low in impact. If a low delivery 
     cigarette with impact and flavor were developed, it may cause 
     the segment of current regular filter smokers who are 
     concerned about their health but demand a flavorful cigarette 
     to voluntarily switch to the low delivery cigarettes. This 
     may seem at first to be a senseless venture since it might 
     result in Marlboro smokers switching to this low delivery 
     cigarette. However, we must recognize the possibility that if 
     we do not develop such a cigarette, it may be developed by 
     another tobacco company. Having developed such a cigarette 
     would also give us an advantage in the event that the 
     government imposes delivery restrictions. Furthermore, some 
     portion of current low delivery smokers may desire to switch 
     to a more flavorful cigarette and others may follow as 
     consumer experience results in changing the image of low 
     delivery cigarettes so that smokers believe a flavorful 
     cigarette can really be ``healthy.''
       It was hypothesized in an earlier study that increasing 
     nicotine to tar (N/T) ratios\1\ from the 107 ratio of most 
     cigarettes currently on the market might increase the 
     subjective strength of low delivery cigarettes and thus their 
     acceptability among regular filter smokers. Therefore, three 
     low delivery cigarettes in the 10 mg tar range with varying 
     N/T ratios were compared to a Marlboro control. (Schori & 
     Martin, 1974b) The results of that study (DL-1) indicated 
     that the 10.7 mg tar, .12 nicotine to tar (N/T) ratio 
     cigarette was comparable to the Marlboro in terms of both 
     subjective acceptability and strength. Although cigarettes in 
     this tar delivery range had previously achieved parity with 
     Marlboro in acceptability (Schori & Martin, 1974a), the DL-1 
     study was the first time that such a cigarette achieved 
     parity in both acceptability and strength.
     \1\Since tar was virtually constant across the three 
     experimental cigarettes, it would have sufficed in this study 
     to refer to nicotine rather than to N/T ratios. However, the 
     use of N/T ratios was intended to facilitate discovering 
     possible trends over different levels of tar. Furthermore, 
     this terminology makes it more readily apparent as to how the 
     data relate to the .07 N/T ratio that is characteristic of 
     most cigarettes currently on the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       However, on the DL-1 study the variations in N/T ratios of 
     the low delivery cigarettes were confronted with variations 
     in tar delivery. Therefore, the present study was designed as 
     a follow-up of the DL-1 study. Three experimental low 
     delivery cigarettes targeted to delivery 10 mg tar with N/T 
     ratios of .07, .10 and .13 were compared to a Marlboro 
     control in terms of subjective acceptability and strength. It 
     was desired that the experimental cigarettes be more similar 
     in tar delivery than was the case in the DL-1 study.


                                methods

     Cigarettes
       The experimental cigarettes were targeted to deliver 10 mg 
     tar with .07, 10 and .13 N/T ratios. To obtain the two 
     highest ratios, it was necessary to add supplementary 
     nicotine in the form of nicotine citrate. The delivery levels 
     obtained for the three experimental cigarettes and a Marlboro 
     control are shown below (for complete analytic data, see 
     Appendix A):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Control 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tar (mg/cigt.)..............      10.4       11.0       11.0       18.0 
Nicotine (mg/cigt.).........       0.68       0.95       1.31       1.03
Tar (mg/puff)...............       1.09       1.13       1.08       2.04
Nicotine (mg/puff)..........        .07        .10        .13        .12
Nicotine/Tar Ratio..........        .06        .09        .12        .06
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Inspection of the above table shows the success in 
     maintaining constant tar over the 
 
[[Page H8133]]

     experimental cigarettes, particularly with regard to tar/
     puff.
     Test procedures
       The test was sent to 300 RP\3\ 85 mm regular filter 
     smokers, half of whom were Marlboro smokers. The panelists 
     received 10 packs of cigarettes; 2 packs of each of the four 
     coded cigarettes (the 3 experimental cigarettes and the 
     Marlboro control) and 2 packs of uncoded Marlboros to 
     complete the carton. They were instructed to smoke the 
     cigarettes in any order they wished as long as they filled in 
     the scales for one set of codes before beginning to smoke the 
     next set. In the event that the panelists smoke the 
     cigarettes in the order suggested by the order of the rating 
     scales on the ballot, all possible presentations of the 
     rating scales for the four cigarettes were used an equal 
     number of times. The cigarettes were rated on both an 
     acceptability scale and a strength scale. (1=dislike 
     extremely to 9=like extremely; 1=extremely weak to 
     9=extremely strong) The ballot is shown in Appendix B.
     Data analysis
       The ratings from the acceptability and strength scales were 
     analyzed by means of a one-way analysis of variance with 
     repeated measures on subjects. Individual comparisons of 
     means, using Duncan's Range Test, were performed in order to 
     assess the significance of differences between pairs of 
     cigarettes where overall significant differences were 
     detected.


                                results

     The return rate
       The return rate was 78%.
     Analyses of variance
       The analyses of variance for the acceptability and strength 
     scale ratings of the total panel are summarized below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     .06 N/  .09 N/  .12 N/             
                           Marlboro     T       T       T    Probability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptability (N=235):                                                  
    X....................     5.77     5.32    5.65    5.26      .0034  
    S.D..................     1.88     1.89    1.91    1.95  ...........
Strength (N=235):                                                       
    X....................     5.34     4.34    4.73    5.62      .0001  
    S.D..................     1.28     1.67    1.46    1.50  ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       From this summary, it can be seen that significant 
     differences (p<.05) were found among cigarettes in both 
     acceptability and strength. A multiple range test (Duncan, 
     1955) was performed to make individual comparisons between 
     mean ratings. The results of this analysis are given below 
     with the mean ratings rearranged in ascending order of 
     magnitude. Those means not underlined by a common line are 
     significantly different from one another (p<.05).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   .12 N/T   .06 N/T   .09 N/T  Marlboro
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptability...................      5.26      5.32      5.65      5.77
------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   .06 N/T   .09 N/T  Marlboro   .12 N/T
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strength........................      4.34      4.73      5.34      5.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       From these analyses it can be seen that the experimental 
     cigarette with the .09 N/T ratio and the Marlboro control 
     were equally acceptable and were more acceptable than the 
     other two experimental cigarettes. These other two 
     experimental cigarettes (.06 and .12 N/T ratio) also were not 
     significantly different from one another in acceptability.
       Further inspection of the individual comparisons reveals 
     that the three experimental cigarettes and the Marlboro 
     control were all significantly different from one another in 
     strength.


                               discussion

       In this study, three low delivery cigarettes in the 10 mg 
     tar range varying in nicotine N/T ratio (.06, .09 and .12) 
     were compared to a Marlboro control in terms of subjective 
     acceptability and strength. The .09 N/T ratio cigarette was 
     found to be equal in acceptability to the Marlboro control. 
     The highest N/T ratio cigarette (.12) and the proportional 
     reduction of tar and nicotine cigarette (.06) were less 
     acceptable than the control. Among the experimental 
     cigarettes, strength ratings went up as N/T ratio increased; 
     and interestingly, the 11 mg tar cigarette with .12 N/T ratio 
     was rated significantly higher in strength than the 18 mg tar 
     Marlboro control.
       These data suggest that acceptability increases as N/T 
     ratio increases up to a certain ratio and then decreases. 
     Thus it seems that increasing the strength of low delivery 
     cigarettes by adding nicotine citrate increases the 
     acceptability up to a point where the cigarettes may be 
     perceived as too strong and acceptability decreases. Since 
     the two highest N/T ratio experimental cigarettes were made 
     by adding nicotine in the form of nicotine citrate spray, 
     there is a possibility that the increased citrate that 
     accompanied the increased nicotine is crucial in the 
     resulting increases in subjective strength.
       The results of the DL-1 study showed overall trends that 
     were very similar to those of the present study. For the 
     experimental cigarettes, strength ratings increased as the N/
     T ratio increased. However, whereas the present study found 
     the .12 N/T ratio cigarette to be a stronger than the 
     Marlboro control, the results of the DL-1 study indicated 
     that these cigarettes were considered equal in strength.
       In regard to acceptability, the DL-1 study results 
     concurred with the results of the present study in that the 
     experimental cigarette with the moderate level of nicotine 
     addition was rated higher in acceptability than the 
     proportional reduction cigarette and equal to the Marlboro 
     control. Since the .12 N/T ratio cigarette in DL-1 was not 
     seen as stronger than the control, it seems logical that the 
     acceptability ratings would not decline. In fact, in the DL-1 
     study, both of the cigarettes with added nicotine were as 
     acceptable as the Marlboro.
       The difference between the two .12 N/T ratio cigarettes in 
     the two studies that caused them to be perceived differently 
     in relation to the control is not obvious. The analytical 
     data for the cigarettes in the DL-1 study are shown in 
     Appendix C.
       Inspection of the analytical data for the two tests reveals 
     that while total alkaloids decreased from DL-1 to the present 
     study for all other cigarettes, they increased in the .12 N/T 
     ratio cigarette. Another possible explanation is that there 
     were subtle taste differences between the .12 N/T ratio 
     cigarettes in the two studies that are not reflected in the 
     analytical data but are responsible for the difference in 
     strength and acceptability ratings. Unfortunately, no data on 
     taste differences are available.
       In conclusion, the results of this study support the DL-1 
     findings that increasing N/T ratios from the .07 level 
     increases the subjective strength of low delivery cigarettes. 
     Additionally, there is an indication that these increases in 
     strength will be accompanied by increased acceptability. 
     However, the data suggest that caution should be exercised 
     such that N/T ratios are not increased to the extent that the 
     increases in acceptability associated with moderate increases 
     in N/T ratio are lost.
     Further research
       In order to clarify the meaning of the results of this 
     study, it would be beneficial to discover whether nicotine 
     has the same effect if added in forms other than nicotine 
     citrate. Perhaps nicotine and citrate interact such that 
     increases in both nicotine and citrate are necessary for any 
     differences in subjective strength.
       Since RP3 is a local panel and there is a possibility 
     of regional differences in cigarette preferences, we propose 
     to conduct another study using the National POL panel. In 
     this study we will test two 10 mg tar cigarettes, with N/T 
     ratios of .07 and .11, with a Marlboro control. The .11 N/T 
     ratio was chosen in an attempt to make a cigarette that will 
     be perceived as stronger than the .09 N/T ratio cigarette in 
     the present study but not as strong as the .12 N/T ratio 
     cigarette. In other words, we are using the guidelines 
     suggested by this study to attempt to make a 10 mg tar 
     cigarette that will equal a Marlboro control in both 
     subjective acceptability and strength.
                               references

       Duncan, D.B. Multiple Range and Multiple F Tests. 
     Biometrics, 1955, 11, 1-42.
       Schori, T.R. Perceived Attributes of Cigarettes. Philip 
     Morris Technical Report, June, 1972.
       Schori, T.R. & Martin, P.G. Low Delivery Cigarettes and 
     Increased RTD. Philip Morris Technical Report, June, 1974a.
       Schori, T.R. & Martin, P.G. Low Delivery Cigarettes and 
     Increased Nicotine/Tar Ratios (DL-1). Philip Morris Technical 
     Report, September, 1974b.

                      APPENDIX A.--ANALYTICAL DATA                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Control     Experimental cigarettes  
                                  Marlboro -----------------------------
                                     85                                 
                                 ----------  D48DK-1   D4BDL-1   D48DM-1
                                   D4BDJ-1                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target--Tar, mg/cigt............                  10        10        10
Target--Nicotine, mg/cigt.......                 0.7       1.0       1.3
Smoke:                                                                  
  Butt Length, mm...............        28        28        28        28
  FTC Tar, mg/cigt..............      18.0      10.4      11.0      11.0
  Nicotine, mg/cigt.............      1.03      0.68      0.95      1.31
  Puffs/cigt....................       8.8       9.5       9.7      10.2
  Filtration Eff., %............        45        60        57        58
  Nicotine/Tar Ratio............     .0572     .0653     .0863     .1190
  Tar, mg/Puff..................      2.04      1.09      1.13      1.08
  Nicotine, mg/Puff.............       .12       .07       .10       .13
Cigarette:                                                              
  Total RTD, in. of H20.........       4.3       5.4       4.6       4.6
  Static Burn. Time, min........       7.7       7.5       7.4       7.8
  Length, mm....................      84.5      84.3      84.2      84.3
  Circumference, mm.............      25.0      25.1      25.1      25.0
Paper:                                                                  
  Additive, type................      Cit.      Cit.      Cit.      Cit.
  Porosity, sec.................        20        17        19        17
Filter:                                                                 
  RTD, in. of H20...............       2.6       4.0       3.6       3.6
  Length, mm....................      20.8      21.0      20.9      21.0
  Weight, g.....................      0.15      0.20      0.19      0.17
  Tipping Paper Length, mm......        25        25        25        25
  Dilution, %...................      None        19        25        26
Filler:                                                                 
  Total Alkaloids, %............      1.47      1.49      1.80      2.97
  Total Reducing Sugars, %......       6.1       6.9       6.8       7.8
  Wt. of Tob., g................     0.757     0.788     0.781     0.790
  Rod Density, g/cc.............     0.239     0.248     0.246     0.251
  Targeted Nicotine.............                                        
  Citrate Spray, %..............        --        --         3         8
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               notes on program review presentation 2/79

       Last year I devoted most of my time to the rationale and 
     conceptualization of our program, and had little time left to 
     talk about what we were in fact doing. Today I'd like to be 
     more concert and talk about the research projects we have 
     underway and planned, with comments to relate the projects to 
     our program objectives and to the R&D Five-Year Plan.
       First let me state our 3 objectives:
       1. To understand the psychological reward the smoker gets 
     from smoking.
       2. To understand the psychophysiology underlying this 
     reward.
       3. To relate this reward to the constituents in smoke.
       Our three lines of investigation:
       1. The effects of nicotine and nicotine-like compounds upon 
     animal behavior.
       2. The effects of smoke and smoke constituents upon the 
     electrical activity in the human brain.
     
[[Page H8134]]

       3. The effects of changes in smoke composition upon puffing 
     behavior, inhalation behavior and descriptive statements by 
     the smoker.
       Our people:
       Let's first talk about Gullotta's work.
       He joined us a year and a half ago. The better part of the 
     first year was used up in getting the EEG lab on line.
       To date he has complete data collection on the first and 
     very crucial study of the effect of smoking on the visual 
     evoked response. At the moment he is working closely with the 
     computer group in analyzing that data.
       What is the VER?
       Why the VER?
       Dr. Gullotta has another study underway. This is a long-
     term project because of the problem of recruiting subjects. 
     He is attempting to catch R&D smokers who have decided to 
     quite before they do so. He records the EEG before they quit, 
     then repeats the recording at fixed intervals following 
     quitting. Subjects are scarce--so the study can take some 
     time. He has picked up 45 to date.
       Hopefully, he will be able to garner some knowledge on an 
     old problem:
       Changes that occur quitting have been cited by Jarvik 
     Russell as withdrawal effects. There have been no long-term 
     studies of abstention, so we don't know whether the observed 
     changes upon quitting are indeed withdrawal effects of an 
     enduring return to baseline. Frank's observations might be of 
     great help at least insofar as CNS mediated changes are 
     concerned.
       Frank has other studies scheduled to being as the VER is 
     completed. If he finds from VER study that he can identify 
     discrete smoke induced event (i.e. a change in the after-
     discharge component for example) he will proceed directly to 
     a comparison of those modes of nicotine administration, 
     inhalation and ingestion and iv injection. At the same time 
     that he is maintaining the EEG, he will monitor nicotine 
     blood level, heart rate and perhaps other peripheral or 
     autonomic signals.
       Obviously, he will need medical collaboration. The Medical 
     Dept. has agreed to work with him.
       Russell has pointed to a possibility that we had also come 
     to consider seriously about the smoker's smoking behavior. In 
     all the titration theorizing, it has been postulated that the 
     smoker is seeking to maintain a supply of nicotine at some 
     optimum level in the bloodstream, and we have lamented the 
     obstacles to getting good tracking of the level of nicotine 
     in the blood. As new knowledge has developed, two 
     observations have emerged which influence our thinking:
       1. Observed smoking patterns are not consistent with the 
     premise of titration for a constant blood level and
       2. The most probable locus of action is within the central 
     nervous system.
       We are quite ignorant of smoke-derived nicotine's course 
     through the brain:
       a. the conditions required for its passage across the blood 
     brain barrier (blood concentration, barrier permeability, 
     etc.)
       b. threshold concentrations required at brain loci for
       c. diffusion rates, selective localization
       d. rate of metabolism
       I think I'd best add here a little concentualizing. Until 
     recently we have entertained a titration hypothesis--we have 
     postulated that the habituated smoker is seeking to maintain 
     some optional level of nicotine in his bloodstream. As a 
     corollary we would expect to see the smoker attune intake to 
     blood level. Given a more diluted smoke, he would smoke more, 
     with more cigarettes or bigger puffs, or deeper inhalations.
       With our attention increasingly drawn to CNS effects of 
     smoking, we are sorely frustrated by the constraints imposed 
     upon us in studying the human smoker. With the effects upon 
     manifest behavior continuing to elude us, we are limited to 
     the EEG.
       But happily there are other organisms than human that have 
     CNS's which respond to nicotine. Which brings me to the 
     comparative psychophysiological programs of Carolyn Levy and 
     Gary Berntson. There is considerably greater license allowed 
     in obtruding upon the corpus integritum of the species white 
     rat than the species Homo Saprin. With apologies both to Gary 
     and Carolyn, I shall pointedly avoid associating study with 
     investigator.
       We are systematically assembling a battery of behavioral 
     tests which can be used in the larger assay program of R&O. 
     Because of the sophisticated level at which the chemistry of 
     nicotine is being investigated, it has become imperative that 
     assay tools be made available to our chemists to assist them 
     in assessing the nicotine likeness of nicotine in its various 
     forms; its analogues, and other related compounds. Since our 
     vital interest in nicotine rests upon its presumed 
     psychophysiological actions, then those behavioral changes 
     that reflect these actions possess intrinsic assay 
     significance. Thus the nicotine likeness of a compound can be 
     expressed in terms of the degree to which it can induce those 
     changes induced by nicotine.
       To date we have evaluated two behavioral tests for 
     nicotine-likeness. One has been incorporated into the assay 
     program. The other is still under investigation.
       The stimulus discrimination technique has been described to 
     you already. The animal is trained to press lever A when 
     injected with nicotine, and lever B when injected with 
     saline. After being trained to a predetermined level of 
     correct hits, the animal is injected with Compound X. The 
     ratio of Lever A to Lever B presses can be construed as an 
     index of nicotine-likeness. We make no pretense to knowledge 
     of the underlying mechanisms--we do submit the method as 
     empirically valid.
       The second technique still under study is the tail flick 
     test. This is a means for determining relative changes in 
     sensitivity to thermal pain induced by impinging focused 
     radiant heat upon the animal's tail. The time from stimulus 
     onset to the tail flick that stops the stimulus is called 
     tail flick latency. We have established that the latency is 
     increased by injected nicotine. Of course, one would expect 
     other compounds to increase latency, as the test is not one 
     of high specificity, but as part of an assay battery it has 
     some merit.
       The nicotine-induced analgesia as reflected in the tail 
     flick latency increases is specific to thermal pain and 
     perhaps some other sources of pain, but does not generalize 
     to all sources. Dr. Berntson is developing a theoretical 
     model based upon these observations and undertaking further 
     research to test the model. He will be telling us about these 
     developments in due time.
       Three other behavioral manifestations of the CNS effects of 
     nicotine are being or about to be evaluated for inclusion in 
     the behavioral assay battery.
       1. Motor activity
       2. Prostration syndrome
       3. Nicotine self-administration
       Yet another assay candidate is the rat EEG.
       This whole program of assay exploration is a two-edged 
     sword for us. There is basic research implicit in the 
     evaluation of each test, in fact, in the very selection of 
     those behaviors which we are monitoring for nicotine effects. 
     I might also point out that some of these tests have 
     potential for establishing dose-response curves. We have 
     already used one for just this purpose. We are forever 
     mindful of the implications of the observed effects of 
     nicotine for clues as to the reinforcing mechanism underlying 
     human smoking.
       The ultimate in this program is an inventory of all the 
     behavioral and quasi-behavioral effects of nicotine at the 
     animal level and a test for each such effect reduced to a 
     parsimonious routine.
       We can even at this early stage anticipate an extensive 
     list of nicotinic behavioral effects and a test routine for 
     each. The assay battery could rapidly become too cumbersome 
     from the sheer number of discrete tests available. We are 
     going to need a set of criteria for selecting those tests to 
     be retained for routine assay.
       One obvious criterion is nicotine specificity--nicotine 
     brings the only compound known to elicit the effect.
       Another criterion would be relevancy to human smoking which 
     would rule out such tests as tail flick or lacency--or the 
     tail pinch test.
       I would point out again that I have not indicated where 
     these studies are being undertaken they may all be here, all 
     at Ohio State, or some at both.
       We have several studies underway and beginning that are 
     more immediately concerned with the cigarette. Frank Ryan is 
     carrying out the long-term project of annual monitoring of 
     preferences, with which I will assure you are sufficiently 
     familiar. The third run is to begin within a few weeks. We 
     are hoping to get some clues as to whether there are trends 
     in cigarette preferences over 4 or 5 year time span; and, if 
     there are trends, what characterizes them.
       Frank Ryan is also beginning a study of the nicotine/tar 
     ratio at the 5 mg tar delivery level. This is a study we 
     would have liked to have undertaken some time back, but only 
     recently has the technology of cigarette making made it 
     possible to get the range of nicotine delivery needed with a 
     constant car delivery.
       As a corollary to this field study, Frank is doing a 
     classical threshold study. What size of a nicotine increment 
     is needed in order to be detected by the smoker? This is to 
     be done not only at the 5 mg tar delivery level but at the 15 
     mg and perhaps the 10 mg level as well. We envision a family 
     of curves with nicotine delivery differences plotted against: 
     of persons detecting difference at three tar delivery levels. 
     Acceptability responses will be gotten at the same time. Such 
     information can be timely and relevant to the recurring 
     expression of concern about the relative downness of N/T 
     ratios in P.M. products
       Yet another product related study being conducted by Ryan 
     is the salivation study. Low tar products are often described 
     as ``hot and dry.'' It is possible that the perceived dryness 
     is attributable to a reduced salivation response, rather than 
     same intrinsic property of the smoke? The question has been 
     addressed before by this laboratory, but indirectly. We don't 
     know of any systematic attempts to measure saliva flow-in 
     response to cigarette-smoke. We judge the question to be 
     important enough to be explored further.
       Dr. Bernston has also some human work underway which I 
     shall mention briefly since it is coordinated with our own 
     program.
       He has nearly completed data analysis on a study or the 
     effect of smoking on automatic response to stress. He used 
     three stress, situations; anticipation of electric shock, 
     viewing autopsy slides and an cognitive task. He recorded 
     almost every measurable automatic response; heart rate, 
     muscle tension, blood flow, respiration, electrogastric 
     events and skin potential.
       He is just beginning another study of the influence of 
     smoking on higher mental processes. We have, as have others, 
     looked for the 

[[Page H8135]]
     effects of smoking upon human performance over the years, without ever 
     discerning a straight forward effect. Or Bernston reasons 
     that the effect may be a subtle one which is real but 
     elusive. He is using a memorizing and recognition task (the 
     Stemberg paradigm) in such a way as to be able to partial out 
     the contributions to overall performance of (1) attention, 
     (2) memory efficiency, (3) rate of memory formation and (4) 
     retrieval efficiency. As a last item, we are finally moving 
     forward on the study of nonobtrusive monitoring of smoke 
     inhalation. Since Neil Nunnally joined us last year, he has 
     taken over the instrumentation problem and brought us to a 
     near on-line state.
       The device is based upon the proposition that 
     circumfarential changes in the chest and the abdomen can be 
     converted to a good estimate of inspired volume.
       We have good evidence that when the circumference changes 
     are small, volume is a linear function. The average total 
     lung capacity of 6 liters, the average smoke inspiration is 
     one liter.
       Considering all the ways to measure, the mercury strain 
     gauge was selected, but there were problems.
       The solution was to minimize the current flow-developed 
     circuitry that provides a 100 M amplification, and a 
     sophisticated method of summing the two inputs to yield a 
     signal that is almost linearly related to volume.
       There is another candidate transducer (inductance charges 
     in coils about the chest and abdomen) already incorporated 
     into a commercially available device. On order, due to arrive 
     by March 1.
       We will be running comparative tests of these two units, 
     select the better one and proceed to solving the remaining 
     problems:
       (a) tagging the smoke-laden inhalation.
       (b) incorporating a recorder into the system.
       When the entire assembly is ready, I will begin a series of 
     studies, all designed to determine the degree to which the 
     smoker accommodates his intake to 1) smoke composition and 2) 
     need.

                                The Pennsylvania State University,


                           Department of Biobehavioral Health,

                               University Park, PA, July 28, 1995.
     Hon. Henry A. Waxman,
     House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Waxman: I have reviewed the attached data on 
     Benson & Hedges Filtered Cigarettes (70 mm) using standard 
     assumptions of inferential statistics.
       The average Nicotine/Tar Ratio for the 17 measurements from 
     1968 to 1985 (not including the 3 measurements for 1981 SP, 
     1981 HP, 1983 HP) is .066 (minimum=0.58, maximum=.088, 
     Standard Deviation=.00738). A score of 0.20 (as was observed 
     in 1981) is very unlikely to come from the same population. 
     The probability of sampling a score at least as large as 0.20 
     is considerably less than 1 in 100,000 (z=18.16). Even the 
     ratio observed in 1983 (0.11) has a probability less than 1 
     in 100,000 of coming from the same population (z=12.19).
       If one looks only at the years when this brand was in the 1 
     mg tar range (from 1978 to 1985), the average ratio for the 4 
     years (not including those years at issue) is 0.075 
     (minimum=.058, maximum=.088, Standard Deviation=.0126). The 
     probability of sampling a score at least as large as 0.20 is 
     considerably less than 1 in 100,000 (z=10.28). The 
     probability of sampling a score at least as large as 0.11 is 
     less than 4 in 1,000 of coming from the same population 
     (z=3.13).
       These analyses support the interpretation that the 
     Nicotine/Tar Ratios were much larger in 1981 and 1983 than in 
     the other years and confirm what is readily apparent to the 
     naked eye when looking at the attached plot of ratios.
           Sincerely,

                                     Lynn T. Kozlowski, Ph.D.,

                                               Professor and Head,
                               Department of Biobehavioral Health.

       REGULAR-LENGTH (70 MM) BENSON & HEDGES FILTERED CIGARETTES       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Year               Tar    (+/-)   Nicotine   (+/-)    Ratio
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-68........................   21.0    (0.5)     1.29    (0.06)   0.061
 2-69........................   20.1     (.5)     1.38     (.03)    .069
10-70........................   18.7     (.4)     1.35     (.03)    .072
 8-71........................   18.4     (.3)     1.30     (.02)    .071
 7-72........................   12.2    (1.1)     0.86     (.09)    .070
 1-73........................    9.9     (.3)      .68     (.03)    .069
 8-73........................    9.8     (.4)      .66     (.03)    .067
 3-74........................    9.4     (.4)      .61     (.03)    .065
 9-74........................    9.1     (.4)      .56     (.03)    .062
 3-75........................    9.1     (.3)      .53     (.02)    .058
 9-75........................    9.3     (.4)      .55     (.02)    .059
 4-76........................    9.2     (.3)      .53     (.02)    .058
 6-77........................    9.8     (.2)      .64     (.02)    .065
 5-78........................    0.9     (.1)      .06     (.01)    .067
12-79........................     .8     (.1)      .07     (.01)    .088
 3-81........................     .6     (.1)      .12     (.01)    .200
12-81........................  (\1\)  .......      .10     (.02)    .200
 3-83........................     .9     (.2)      .10     (.01)    .111
 2-84........................    1.3     (.2)      .09     (.01)    .069
 1-85........................    1.2     (.1)      .07     (.01)    .058
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(\1\)Below the sensitivity of the method (i.e., <0.5)                   



                          ____________________