Two tobacco companies in November introduced cigarettes featuring novel technology designed to deliver lower doses of carcinogens to smokers, suggesting that they may be a healthier alternative to standard cigarettes.
But antismoking forces condemn the marketing of the new cigarettes. They point out that there is no proof these products are safer that and such claims may give smokers a baseless excuse not to quit and others an excuse to start smoking.
Vector Tobacco of Durham, N.C., touts Omni as "the first reduced carcinogen cigarette." Vectors parent company owns the Liggett Group, which makes discount-priced cigarettes and, until 1999, made Chesterfields, L&Ms, and Larks. Company president and chief executive officer Bennett LeBow, a tobacco industry maverick, is best known for a strategic move in which he acknowledged that the industry long knew of tobaccos harms and, at the same time, ensured that Liggett paid no share of the legal settlement to the states.
Omnis tobacco is treated with palladium, a metal used in automobile catalytic converters, said Tony Albino, Ph.D., Vectors vice president for public health affairs. He said that palladium increases the burn efficiency and reduces the formation of several carcinogens. Omni also has a carbon filter to absorb volatile gases, said Albino, formerly a researcher at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York and former director of research at the American Health Foundation in Valhalla, N.Y.
"The biggest advantage is that Omni reduces a whole range of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which evidence says are the primary tumor initiators," he said. "The only way to get rid of them is the way weve done itto prevent them from being formed in the first place." In December, Vector released test results to bolster its claims of reduced carcinogen yield (on the Web at http://www.omnicigs.com). Depending on test method, Omni produced from 19% to 66% less of various carcinogens than a leading U.S. brand. Albino said scientists at Vector are working to further reduce smokers exposure to harmful chemicals.
The same week Omni debuted nationwide, the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. of Louisville, Ky., began test-marketing Advance Lights cigarettes in Indianapolis. Brown & Williamson, the third-largest U.S. cigarette company and maker of Lucky Strikes, Pall Malls, and Kools, claims that Advances three-part filter reduces the delivery of toxins including tar, aldehydes, hydrogen cyanide, and benzene and that its patented curing process inhibits nitrosamine formation.
Joel B. Cohen, Ph.D., professor of marketing and director of the Center for Consumer Research at the University of Florida, Gainesville, said that from a marketing standpoint, these cigarettes are "a good strategic move" for manufacturers.
"There has always been a health-concerned segment of the cigarette market, people who years ago switched to True and Vantage and then to other brands that claimed reduced tar, and to say to these people, you can have a reduced-carcinogen product that is equally good in tasteits a very strong appeal."
Advertisements for Omniwhich have appeared in People, Time, and other popular magazinesbring a new level of candor to tobacco marketing, using the words "carcinogens" and "toxins" in slogans and headlines. And Omni packs are printed with the warning, "reductions in carcinogens ... have NOT been proven to result in a safer cigarette. This product produces tar, carbon monoxide, and other harmful by-products."
But critics say the overall message is that the products are safera claim that has yet to be proven. "These products could lead a whole new generation of consumers to use them under the false belief that its been scientifically proven theyre safer," said Matthew Myers, J.D., president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids in Washington, D.C.
"Tobacco companies cant be trusted to evaluate the safety of their products," he added. The campaign is pushing for legislation that would give the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate health-related claims for cigarettes.
Cohen agrees the Omni ads will mislead smokers who are worried about their health. Truth in advertising refers not only to what an ad explicitly states but to what it communicates, he said. "Just as a drowning man will clutch at anything, smokers are very likely to interpret this ad expansively rather than narrowly," he said, "to interpret it as meaning a significant reduction in risk, not just a significant reduction in carcinogens. And unless that claim is verifiable and true, then the company lacks the substantiation to make the claim, and the Federal Trade Commission is empowered to ask them to cease and desist."
Brenda Mack, an FTC spokesperson, said that the FTC is aware of the claims being made for the cigarettes, but could not confirm that the agency is actively investigating them or considering any action.
Albino countered that his company states only that Omni delivers reduced carcinogens and toxins, not in itself a health claim.
"Until we have objective data that will pass muster with [the National Cancer Institute], were not going to make any health claims," he added. Vector touts Omni as the next best thing to quitting, and Albino said this approach is in line with current public health policy emphasizing harm reduction.
Scott Leischow, Ph.D., chief of the NCIs Tobacco Control Research Branch, said that not enough is known about the exact carcinogenic processes involved in smoking to determine whether Omni and Advance are safer than other cigarettes.
"There are many, many dangerous substances in cigarettes," he said. "If we take out one class of carcinogens, we dont know if people are going to smoke in a different way that increases the delivery of other very harmful substances and undermine any potential benefit."
Albino said that, unlike smokers of low-tar cigarettes, Omni smokers cannot defeat the carcinogen-reducing measures with deeper draws of smoke. But the Web site for Omni cautions that the catalytic process used to treat the tobacco measurably increases the levels of nitric oxide, which is believed to contribute to cardiovascular risks.
As shown in the NCI monograph on "low-tar" or "light" cigarettes released in November (see related story, p. 162), Leischow said, "We need data to understand the true impact of any changes in cigarette design. Smokers should know that theres simply no evidence that using these new products will reduce risk of developing smoking related cancers."
In focus groups sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, most smokers appeared skeptical that Omni and Advance would reduce cancer risk, especially if the products delivered the "full flavor" they want, and some participants were put off by the frank wording of the ads.
"It says less carcinogensbut theyre still in there," one man noted.
This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:
![]() |
||||
|
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement |