We would like to draw our readers‘ attention to the following three joint publications in this issue:
· HAHN and SCHAUB (page 100)
· ROEMER et al. (page 117)
· INTORP et al. (page 139)
The three papers are based on an initiative of the German regulative authorities who requested and initiated a research project to get more information concerning the influence of tobacco additives on the composition of cigarette mainstream smoke. Since up to now, most of the peer reviewed publications on the effects of additives originate from scientists based in the tobacco industry, in this case an independent regulative laboratory (Chemical and Veterinary Surveillance Agency Sigmaringen) was asked to evaluate the effects of the tobacco additives sucrose, cocoa powder and glycerol on the amounts of several selected compounds in cigarette mainstream smoke. The test cigarettes for these evaluations were manufactured in the pilot plant of BAT Germany and are described and characterized by HAHN and SCHAUB. This paper also contains the results of the regulatory laboratory on the effects of the three additives on mainstream smoke composition.
The influence of these additives on cigarette mainstream smoke was also evaluated by ROEMER et al. and INTORP et al. using the identical test cigarettes as studied by HAHN and SCHAUB. While INTORP et al. in their three laboratory study analyzed the same mainstream smoke component as HAHN and SCHAUB, ROEMER et al. studied the effects of these tobacco ingredients on the levels of 39 different components in mainstream smoke of the test cigarettes and also on different endpoints of some selected toxicological in vitro assays. The chemical analytical work necessary for this evaluation was done by Labstat International, an independent contract laboratory; the in vitro tests were done by the Philip Morris Research Laboratories, Cologne, Germany. The results obtained by the participating laboratories showed no overall significant effects of the tested additives on the levels of the selected smoke constituents and the biological activity.
Finally, we would like to inform our readers that Nicolas Baskevitch has decided to retire from the advisory board, being a member since 2006. We would like to thank him for his collaboration in improving the manuscripts submitted to the Journal.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.