A Robust Method for Estimating Human Smoked Cigarette Yields from Filter Analysis Data

Open access


The analysis of spent filters from human-smoked (HS) cigarettes has been used to estimate cigarette yields for over three decades. Until recently, the whole filter was used for estimation; however a part-filter method has been shown to improve the accuracy of estimated HS yields. The part-filter method uses only the mouth-end portion of the filter, downstream of the ventilation holes, for analysis. In this portion, the filtration efficiency is relatively constant irrespective of typical puff flow rates of humans and also minimizes butt length effects (e.g. nicotine condensation) on filtration efficiency. Therefore, the estimations of HS cigarette yields are more robust to human smoking conditions than previous whole-filter methods.

British American Tobacco has adopted this method to obtain better understanding of how smokers actually use their products in their everyday environment. This can give information to help understand approaches to harm reduction. Since adopting this method, modifications and quality control features have been added to improve the accuracy of the estimation. This paper will describe in detail the methodology currently in use, along with sources of error, storage studies, quality control, repeatability and reproducibility.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Ashton H. and D.W. Watson: Puffing frequency and nicotine intake in cigarette smokers; Brit. Med. J. 3 (1970) 679–681.

  • 2. Forbes W.F. J.C. Robinson J.A. Hanley and H.N. Colburn: Studies on the nicotine exposure of individual smokers. I. Changes in mouth level exposure to nicotine on switching to lower nicotine cigarettes; Int. J. Addict. 11 (1976) 933–950.

  • 3. Schulz W. and F. Seehofer: Smoking behaviour in Germany – The analysis of cigarette butts (KIPA); in: Smoking Behaviour; edited by R.E. Thornton Churchill-Livingstone Edinburgh London New York 1978 pp. 259–276.

  • 4. Green C.R. F.W. Conrad Jr. K.A. Bridle and M.F. Borgerding: A liquid chromatography procedure for analysis of nicotine on cellulose acetate filters a) Bates Number 512314519/4531 Legacy Database http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sjv33d00/pdf accessed on October 2 2008. Paper presented at the CORESTA symposium in Winston-Salem NC October 31-November 4 1982; b) Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 13 (1985) 11–16.

  • 5. Overton J.R.: Filtration of cigarette smoke: Relative contributions of inertial impaction diffusional depo-sition and direct interception; Beitr. Tabakforsch. 7 (1973) 117–120.

  • 6. Dwyer R.W. and SG. Abel: The efficiencies of celluose acetate filters; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 13 (1986) 243–253.

  • 7. Norman V. A.M. Ihrig R.A. Shoffner and M.S. Ireland: The effect of tip dilution on the filtration efficiency of upstream and downstream segments of cigarette filters; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 12 (1984) 178–185.

  • 8. Baker R.R. M. Dixon and C. Hill: The incidence and consequences of filter vent blocking amongst British smokers; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 18 (1998) 71–83.

  • 9. St. Charles F.K.: A robust method for determining consumer smoked cigarette yields from filter analytical data; 55th Tobacco Science Research Conference Program Booklet and Abstracts Vol.55 Paper 92 2001 pp.73–74.

  • 10. Shepperd C.J. F.K. St. Charles M. Lien and M. Dixon: Validation of methods for determining con-sumer smoked cigarette yields from cigarette filter ana-lysis; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 22 (2006) 176–184.

  • 11. St. Charles F.K. G.R. Krautter M. Dixon and D.C. Mariner: A comparison of nicotine dose estimates in smokers between filter analysis salivary cotinine and urinary excretion of nicotine metabolites; Psycho-pharmacology (Berl.) 189 (2006) 345–354.

  • 12. St. Charles F.K. A.A. Kabbani and MF Borgerding: Estimating tar and nicotine exposure: Human smoking versus machine generated smoke yields; Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. (2009) doi:10.1016/j-yrthp.2009.08.011.

  • 13. St. Charles F.K. and M. Lien: Consumer smoked ciga-rette yields of reduced toxin lights cigarettes compared to other lights brands; 58th Tobacco Science Research Conference Program Booklet and Abstracts Vol.58 Paper 39 2004 pp.44.

  • 14. Moldoveanu S.C. and F.K. St. Charles: Differences in the chemical composition of the particulate phase of inhaled and exhaled cigarette mainstream smoke; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 22 (2007) 290–302.

  • 15. Moldoveanu S.C. W.M. Coleman III and J. Wilkins: Determination of carbonyl compound in exhaled ciga-rette smoke; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 22 (2007) 346–357.

  • 16. Sloan C.H. and J.G. Curran: Spectrophotometric deter-mination of filtration of cigarette filters; Tob. Sci. 25 (1981) 57–60.

  • 17. ISO 3308: Routine analytical cigarette smoking machine – Definition and standard conditions; International Organization for Standardization Geneva 2000.

  • 18. ISO 4387: Cigarettes – Determination of total and nico-tine free dry particulate matter using a routine analy-tical smoking machine; International Organization for Standardization Geneva 2000.

  • 19. ISO 10362-1: Cigarettes – Determination of water in smoke condensates Part 1: Gas-chromatographic method; International Organization for Standardization Geneva 1999.

  • 20. ISO 10315: Methods for chemical analysis of tobacco and tobacco products. Determination of nicotine in smoke condensate of cigarettes (gas-chromatographic method); International Organization for Standardi-zation Geneva 1991.

  • 21. CORESTA Recommended Method No. 9. Determi-nation of nicotine in cigarette filters by gas chromato-graphy analysis; 1989 www.coresta.org/ Recom-mendedMethods/CRM_09.pdf.

  • 22. Federal Trade Commission: Cigarettes: Testing for tar and nicotine content; Fed Regist. 1967 32 11178.

  • 23. Nelson P.R. A. Campbell B. Brown and D. Brown: Storage stability of filters for yield-in-use measure-ments; 59th Tobacco Science Research Conference Program Booklet and Abstracts Vol.59 Paper 78 2005 pp.61.

  • 24. Minutes of the CORESTA Task Force: “Routine Analytical Chemistry” 3rd meeting in Stockholm; 15th June 198 Copy available from the corresponding author.

  • 25. Ohnishi A. Y Akinaga K. Kobayashi M. Ishii K. Maeda and M. Uehara: Studies on the gas chromato-graphic determination of nicotine removal of cigarette filters (I). Determination of nicotine in mainstream smoke and butt filter tips; Nippon Sembai Kosha Chuo Kenkyusho Kenkya Hokoku 114 (1972) 97–104.

  • 26. St. Charles F.K. A.A. Kabbani and M.W. Ogden: Smoking behavior: How close to the tipping do con-sumers actually smoke?; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 21 (2005) 435–440.

  • 27. CORESTA Recommended Method No. 23. Determi-nation of total and nicotine-free dry particulate matter using routine analytical cigarette-smoking machine-determination of total particulate matter and pre-paration for water and nicotine measurements; 1991. www.coresta.org/Recommended_Methods/CRM_23. pdf.

  • 28. NIST: Chemical Webbook; http://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi/91-22-5-UVVis.jdx?JCAMP=C91225&Index=0&Type=UVVis. Accessed April 19 2008.

  • 29. Life Sciences Research Office: Exposure assessment in the evaluation of potential reduced-risk tobacco products; Lewis K.D. (Ed.) Life Science Research Office Bethesda MD 2007 pp. 90–91.

  • 30. Feng S. S.E. Plunkett K. Lam S. Kapur R. Muhammad Y. Jin M. Zimmermann P. Mendes R. Kinser and H.J. Roethig: A new method for estimating the retention of selected smoke constituents in the respiratory tract of smokers during cigarette smoking; Inhal. Toxicol. 19 (2007) 169–179.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.69

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.295
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.491

Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 147 62 2
PDF Downloads 93 56 1