There are many different kinds of cigarettes and tobacco available in the market. Since nicotine content of various brands of cigarettes are very variable, therefore evaluation and comparison of nicotine content of different brands of cigarettes is important. The goal of the present study was to determine and compare nicotine content of various domestic and imported cigarettes available in the area.
Addict Health. 2012 Winter-Spring; 4(1-2): 28â35.
PMID: 24494133
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
AbstractBackgroundMethods
Fourteen popular imported brands and nine popular domestic brands of cigarettes and three available brands of tobaccos were investigated for the amounts of nicotine content. Nicotine was extracted from each cigarette and tobacco samples and was analyzed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method.
Findings
The amount of nicotine in each cigarette was from 6.17 to 12.65 mg (1.23 ± 0.15 percent of tobacco weight in each cigarette) in domestic cigarettes. It was between 7.17-28.86 mg (1.80 ± 0.25 percent of tobacco weight in each cigarette) for imported cigarette, and between 30.08- 50.89 mg (3.82 ± 1.11 percent) for the pipe nicotine. There was significant difference in nicotine amount between imported and domestic brands of cigarettes. There was also no significant difference in nicotine content between light and normal cigarettes in imported brands.
Conclusion
Nicotine content of all tested cigarettes, imported and domestic brands, were higher than the international standard.
Keywords: Nicotine, Tobacco, Cigarettes, Human health, Brand
Introduction
Using tobacco is one of the leading preventable causes of disease and premature death worldwide. Tobacco use contributes in 10 global deaths and is the second major cause of mortality in the world.,2 There are approximately 1.25 billion smokers in the world representing about a third of the adult global population; 800 million of these people live in developing countries. While the cigarette consumption has been increased in most of the developing countries, the past 25 years has been marked by a steady decline in cigarette consumption in some developed countries. However the world cigarette production has increased about four times during the last 50 years.3-7 It has been reported that to date, more than 3000 chemicals have been isolated from tobacco which more than 1000 of these chemical constituents present in unburnt.8-9
Nicotine is the major active molecule in cigarette smoke. It is an alkaloid present in the leaves of Nicotiana tabacom. It is colorless, highly volatile alkaloid. In large doses nicotine is highly toxic. Major symptoms of nicotine poisoning are sweating, vomiting, mental confusion, diminished pulse rate and breathing difficulty. People who smoke have more chronic illnesses, including emphysema and bronchitis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, bronchopulmonary disease, etc.-15 There are many brands of cigarette (domestic and imported) available in Iranian market. Therefore, it seems important to measure the amount of nicotine in different kinds of cigarettes which is generally used by the people in this country.
Most of the imported cigarettes have labeled with the nicotine yields and many consumers are highly motivated to select cigarettes with lower nicotine yields for their health benefits. However, the nicotine level rating on the cigarette label (12 mg tar and 1 mg nicotine in a low-yield cigarette) is not the same as the total amount of nicotine present in the cigarette., The ânicotine yieldâ is determined by a smoking machine; a syringe which draws 32 ml puffs each minute unit the total length of a cigarette is burned. On the other hand, measuring the total amount of nicotine that exists in the cigarette is called ânicotine contentâ.
Since nicotine is the major compound in cigarettes and it is highly toxic, knowing the amount of nicotine content in cigarettes can be valuable information for the people smoking cigarettes. In this project the amount of nicotine content of various popular brands of the imported and domestic cigarettes available in the Iranian market was investigated.
Methods
Pure nicotine was obtained from Fluka, Switzerland. All other solvents and chemicals were of analytical grade and obtained from Sigma Aldrich GmbH. Sternheim. Germany.
Cigarette and tobacco products
Twenty two different brands of cigarettes, nine popular domestic brands of cigarette (made in Iran) and thirteen popular brands of the imported cigarettes, available in the market were chosen to evaluate their nicotine content (Table 1). All brands were filter cigarettes except for one domestic brand which was non-filter cigarette. Furthermore, three available and popular imported pipe tobaccos (Captain Black Cherry, Captain Black Royal, Captain Black Gold) were also investigated for their nicotine contents. All the cigarette and tobacco samples were obtained from the market.
Table 1
The name of the popular domestic and imported brands of cigarettes that were studied
Extraction procedure
Four pack of each brand of cigarette was chosen randomly and one cigarette from each pack was taken to test. Before any extraction, papers and filters of the cigarettes were removed and the amount of tobacco in each cigarette was weighed. The tobacco of each cigarette was crashed carefully in a blender for one minute. The crashed tobacco of each cigarette was quantitatively suspended in 100 ml of mixture of methanol: 0.1 N NaOH (1:1) solutions. The mixture ultrasonically vibrated for 1 hour and then centrifuged for 10 minutes. To 1 ml of the supernatant, 2 ml of metronidazole solution (0.2 mg/ml, using H2O as solvent, as internal standard) was added and the total volume was made up to total of 10 ml, using 0.01 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) solution. From this solution, 20 µl were injected into the HPLC (n = 3). In orders to measure the nicotine quantity of three different popular pipe tobacco, five grams of each tobacco were placed in a glass plate and left at 70°C in an oven for 60 minutes to dry. The dried tobacco was weighed again and the amounts of moisture in each brand of tobacco were estimated. However, the same extraction procedure described for cigarette was used to extract nicotine from pipe tobaccos and a solution was prepared for injection into the high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The test was not blinded to the brands and all the analysis were done in triplicate.
Chromatographic conditions
There are several analytical methods available for measuring nicotine in cigarette.- In the present study one of the published HPLC methods according to the laboratory condition was chosen and applied for measuring nicotine in cigarettes after some modifications. The HPLC system consisted of a pump (Model 600E, waters), a variable wavelength detector (Model 484, waters), a U6K injector and a recorder (Model 745B, waters). The HPLC column was a reverse phase C18 column (4 µm, 150 ´ 4.6 mm i.d., Nova pack, Waters) operated at ambient temperature (25 ± 1 °C) in an air conditioned room. The mobile phase was consisted of 12% acetonitrile in 0.01 M phosphate buffer at a flow rate of 1 ml/min. Concentrated orthophosphoric acid was used to adjust the pH of the mobile phase to 7.0. The mobile phase was then filtered and degassed before use, using a vacuum filter system equipped with 0.45 mm filter membrane. The absorbance was monitored at 261 nm. The retention time for nicotine and metronidazole were 6.42 and 2.95 minutes, respectively. No interfering peaks from tobacco extract were observed. Nicotine concentration was calculated using peak area ratio of internal standard and sample peak. Nicotine content was expressed as the concentration of nicotine in tobacco and also as the total amount of nicotine in one entire cigarette.
Standard Solutions
Stock solution (0.2 mg/ml) of nicotine and metronidazole (internal standard) were prepared by dissolving accurately weighed quantities of pure compounds separately in distilled water. The stock solution remained stable for more than a month when stored at -20°C. Working standard solutions of nicotine (different concentrations of 10, 15, 20, 23 and 30 µg/ml) were prepared by dilution of the stock solution with distilled water. To 1 ml of each standard sample, 2 ml of internal standard was added and the volume made up to 10 ml with distilled water as for the test samples. These standard samples were also injected to the HPLC. The standard solutions of nicotine were freshly prepared daily prior to use.
Marlboro MentholResults
The standard samples were used to evaluate the method of analysis. Before the analysis of the nicotine samples which were extracted from different brands of cigarette, the method was evaluated. Calibration curve were constructed by plotting peak height ratios of nicotine to internal standard against the respective concentrations. The standard curve over the range of 0 to 30 µg/ml was linear. Intra- and inter-day variations were assessed at 10, 20 and 30 µg/ml. The coefficients of variation were between 1.9% and 4.3%.
The amount of nicotine and percentage of nicotine in each cigarette, in thirteen imported brands and nine brands of domestic cigarette are presented in tables 2 and âand3,3, receptively. Percentage and amount of nicotine in three tested pipe tobacco were also evaluated and the findings are presented in table 4.
Table 2
Amounts of nicotine and tobacco as well as percentage of nicotine content in each cigarette in domestic brands*
*Four pack of each brand of cigarette was randomly chosen and one cigarette from each pack was taken for measurements
Table 3
Amounts of nicotine and tobacco as well as percentage of nicotine content in each cigarette of popular imported brands*
*Four pack of each brand of cigarette was randomly chosen and one cigarette from each pack was taken for measurements
Table 4
Amounts of nicotine and percentage of nicotine content in of one gram of popular imported brands of pipe tobacco
Cigarettes contained an average of 1.80 ± 0.25 (mean ± SD), 1.23 ± 0.15 and 3.82 ± 1.11 percentage of nicotine for the imported brands of cigarettes, the domestic brands of cigarettes and imported pipe tobaccos, respectively. Average amount of nicotine and tobacco in one entire cigarette of imported brands were 13.41 ± 4.81 mg (ranged 7.17-28.86 mg), and 0.80 ± 0.49 g (ranged 0.38-2.48 g), respectively. They were 0.28 ± 1.90 mg (ranged 6.17-12.65 mg) and 0.77 ± 0.14 g (ranged 0.45-0.93 g) for the domestic brands of cigarettes, respectively (Table 2 and âand3).3). However, the average amount of nicotine in one gram of different imported brands of pipe tobacco was 38.17 ± 11.15 mg (ranged 30.08-50.89 mg).
Variation in the percentage of nicotine between the tested domestic and imported brand of cigarettes as well as between light and ordinary tested cigarettes were shown in figures 1 and âand2,2, respectively. In addition, the percentage of nicotine content variation among all the testes light cigarettes were compared in figure 3.
Percentages of nicotine in different domestic and imported brands of cigarettes (Mean ± SD)
Comparison between percentages of nicotine in light and ordinary cigarettes (Mean ± SD)
Comparison between percentages of nicotine in different light cigarettes (Mean ± SD)
Discussion
Thirteen popular brands of imported and nine popular brands of domestic cigarettes as well as three brands of imported pipe tobacco were analyzed for their amount and percentage of nicotine content. Accordingly, cigarettes brand â57â contained the lowest amounts of nicotine and âMehrâ contained the highest amounts of nicotine. Although the amounts of nicotine in these cigarettes were significantly different but the percentage of nicotine in both of these cigarettes were about the same. Mortal kombat vs dc fatalities xbox 360. Statistical analysis showed that there was a statistically significant difference in the amounts and percentage of nicotine between cigarettes randomly chosen from four different packs of each domestic brand.
Among the imported brands, cigarette âpineâ contained the lowest amounts of nicotine and cigarette âWinstonâ contained the highest amounts of nicotine (14.40 mg). The percentage of nicotine in these imported brands was different. Statistical analysis showed that in imported brands, there was a significant difference in the amounts and percentage of nicotine between the cigarettes randomly chosen from four different packs of each brands.
Although the amount of tobacco in domestic and imported cigarettes was not significantly different, but there were significant differences in nicotine balance (amount and percentage of nicotine) between domestic and imported cigarettes. In all the available tested cigarettes, the amount of nicotine and tobacco widely varied based on their length and size, which determined the amounts of tobacco in each cigarette. Therefore, the amount of nicotine and tobacco in different brands depended on the way they were made.
Considering the amounts of tobacco in each cigarette and evaluating the percentage of nicotine in domestic brands, the highest percentage of nicotine were found in âBahmanâ cigarette and the in âShirazâ cigarette. For imported brands the highest percentage of nicotine were found in âWinston lightâ cigarette and the lowest in âMond lightâ cigarette. There has been many reports and research about nicotine and tobacco.7,, In addition, there has been some attempt to introduce smokeless tobacco product by cigarette industry. The large variation in the levels of some toxicants and carcinogens in these products indicates that there is more effort needed to reduce the amounts of these toxic compounds in the new and traditional smokeless tobacco products.
Some of the researches are about the evaluation of the nicotine content of cigarettes available in the market. A report from Japan indicates the determination of nicotine content in popular cigarettes. In this report sixteen domestic and seventeen imported brand of cigarette were studied. One of the brands (Kent) tested in Japan were the same as what we analyzed in Iran. The average amounts of nicotine were 11.24 and 14.61 mg, and percentage of nicotine were 1.71% and 1.80% in each of these cigarette analyzed in Japan and in Iran, respectively.
It is clear that in all the available cigarettes, the amount of nicotine and tobacco widely varied according to their length and size, which determine the amounts of tobacco in each cigarette. Therefore, the amount of nicotine and tobacco not only in different brands but even for one brand depends on the way they were made. Among the imported tobacco, the âCaptain Black Goldâ brand had the lowest percentage of nicotine while the brand âCaptain Black Cherryâ had the highest percentage of nicotine. Download sketchup for free.
Some of the imported cigarettes were labeled as âlightâ. Considering the amount of tobacco as well as amount and percentage of nicotine, no significant differences were found between normal and light cigarettes. The main differences between them, if there was any, probably depended on the way they made as well as the length and size of the cigarettes.
Conclusion
Finally, it can be concluded that the average amount (as well as the percentage) of nicotine in domestic cigarettes are lower in comparison to the imported one. Considering findings of the present study and other published data as well as the highly addictive psychoactive characteristic of nicotine in tobacco products, it is suggested that nicotine be thoroughly decreased in these products as low as possible in order to reduce the chance of damages to human health caused by long-time cigarette smoking. Although the best way and the only safe and effective way to minimize smoking related health risks is to avoid smoking.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the authorities in Mashhad University of Medical Sciences and in School of Pharmacy (MUMS) for their supports. The results described in this study were part of a Pharm. D. degree thesis.
Footnotes
Conflicts of Interest
The Authors have no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
1. Hammond D, O'Connor RJ. Constituents in tobacco and smoke emissions from Canadian cigarettes. Tob Control. 2008;17(Suppl 1):i24âi31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. World Health Organization. Tobacco Free Initiative (TFI). 2009. Available from: URL: http://www.who.int/tobacco/en/
3. Lee WC, Li TL, Cheng WJ, Chang PC, Chou SHS. Survey of Nicotine and Tar Yields of Domestic and Imported Cigarettes. Journal of Food and Drug Analysis. 1998;6(4):691â701.[Google Scholar]
4. Mackay J, Crofton J. Tobacco and the developing world. British Medical Bulletin. 1996;52(1):206â21. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Griesbach D, Amos A, Currie C. Adolescent smoking and family structure in Europe. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56(1):41â52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Fleming CB, Kim H, Harachi TW, Catalano RF. Family processes for children in early elementary school as predictors of smoking initiation. J Adolesc Health. 2002;30(3):184â9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Agha Molaei T, Zare SH. Cigarette and Hookah using pattern in over-15 population of Bandar Abbas, A population based study. Hormozgan Med J. 2008;11(4):241â6.[Google Scholar]
8. Roberts DL. Natural tobacco flavor. Recent Adv Tob Sci. 1988;14:49â81.[Google Scholar]
9. World Health Organization. Guiding Principles for the Development of Tobacco Product Research and Testing Capacity and Proposed Protocols for the Initiation of Tobacco Product Testing. 2009. Available from: URL: http://who.int/tobacco/global_interaction/tobreg/goa_2003_principles/en/
10. Stepanov I, Jensen J, Hatsukami D, Hecht SS. New and traditional smokeless tobacco: comparison of toxicant and carcinogen levels. Nicotine Tob Res. 2008;10(12):1773â82.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Benowitz NL, Hall SM, Stewart S, Wilson M, Dempsey D, Jacob P. Nicotine and carcinogen exposure with smoking of progressively reduced nicotine content cigarette. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16(11):2479â85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Hecht SS, Murphy SE, Carmella SG, Li S, Jensen J, Le C, et al. Similar uptake of lung carcinogens by smokers of regular, light, and ultralight cigarettes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(3):693â8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Charles PO. Drug Addiction. In: Brunton LL, Chabner BA, Knollmann BC. Goodman & Gilman's The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 11th. New York, NY: Pergamon press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
14. Feyerabend C, Russell MA. A rapid gas-liquid chromatographic method for the determination of cotinine and nicotine in biological fluids. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1990;42(6):450â2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Sweetman S. Martindale: The Complete Drug Reference. 35th. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
16. Jarvis MJ, Boreham R, Primatesta P, Feyerabend C, Bryant A. Nicotine yield from machine-smoked cigarettes and nicotine intakes in smokers: evidence from a representative population survey. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(2):134â8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Fukumoto M, Kubo H, Ogamo A. Determination of nicotine content of popular cigarettes. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1997;39(4):225â7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Zhang Y, Cong Q, Xie Y, JingxiuYang Y, Zhao B. Quantitative analysis of routine chemical constituents in tobacco by near-infrared spectroscopy and support vector machine. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc. 2008;71(4):1408â13. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Hariharan M, VanNoord T. Liquid-chromatographic determination of nicotine and cotinine in urine from passive smokers: comparison with gas chromatography with a nitrogen-specific detector. Clin Chem. 1991;37(7):1276â80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Haddad LM, Winchester JF. Clinical Management of Poisoning and Drug Overdose. 2nd. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1990. [Google Scholar]
21. Paszkiewicz GM, Pauly JL. Spectrofluorometric method for measuring tobacco smoke particulate matter on cigarette filters and Cambridge pads. Tob Control. 2008;17(Suppl 1):153â8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Hebert R. What's new in nicotine & tobacco research? Nicotine Tob Res. 2008;10(12):1671â5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Addiction & Health are provided here courtesy of Farzanegan Radandish Co.
When it comes to new rules for marketing so-called light cigarettes, tobacco companies plan to honor the letter of the law â but to shade the truth, critics say.
Come June, under the new federal tobacco law, cigarette companies will no longer be allowed to use words like âlightâ or âmildâ on packages to imply that some cigarettes are safer than others.
But in a move that critics say simply skirts the new rules, tobacco companies plan to use packaging to make those same distinctions: light colors for light cigarettes.
So Marlboro Lights, the nationâs best-selling brand, from Philip Morris, will be renamed Marlboro Gold, according to a flier the company recently sent to distributors. Likewise, Marlboro Ultra Lights will change into Marlboro Silver.
And anticipating the new rules, R.J. Reynolds has already changed Salem Ultra Lights, which are sold in a silver box, to Silver Box.
Continue reading the main story
âTheyâre circumventing the law,â said Gregory N. Connolly, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health. âTheyâre using color coding to perpetuate one of the biggest public health myths into the next century.â
The National Cancer Institute says there are no health benefits from light cigarettes and that they may be more dangerous because some people inhale them more deeply than regular cigarettes.
The Food and Drug Administration has begun a federal review of the color-coding approach, a step that could conceivably lead to further actions against products designated as light.
The law taking effect this summer does not bar companies from making light cigarettes, only from using words like âlightâ in marketing. Cakewalk pro audio 9 free download full. The industry says that it is complying and that it should be free to use colors on its packages to market different product lines to adult consumers.
âColors are really used to identify and differentiate different brand packs,â David M. Sylvia, a spokesman for Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, said Thursday. âWe do not use colors to communicate whether one product is less harmful or more harmful than another.â
In a letter to the F.D.A. on Thursday, James E. Dillard III, a senior vice president of Altria, said banning certain colors would be unconstitutional under commercial speech and property protections.
The tobacco regulation passed last year gave the F.D.A. sweeping new regulatory authority over tobacco. One new requirement is that companies must prove to the F.D.A. that a product is safer than conventional cigarettes before it can be marketed as such.
While Congress specifically banned some terms, including âlowâ and âmildâ â present on about half the packages of cigarettes sold in the United States â it also gave the F.D.A. authority to act against âsimilar descriptorsâ that could mislead consumers to think certain products were less risky.
Last month, the agency published a notice that it could take action against colors like silver or pastels, as well as additional words like âsilver,â âsmoothâ and ânatural,â which some companies are still planning to use on cigarette packages. The notice sought public and industry comments, which are due Friday.
Newsletter Sign UpContinue reading the main storyThank you for subscribing.An error has occurred. Please try again later.You are already subscribed to this email.
Kathleen Quinn, a spokeswoman for the new F.D.A. Center for Tobacco Products, said Thursday that the agency would âthoroughly reviewâ the use of color on cigarette packages by June 22, the effective date of the wording ban and the first anniversary of the lawâs passage.
As it happens, Friday is also the deadline for petitions to be filed with the Supreme Court asking it to hear appeals from the 2006 conviction of tobacco makers for racketeering in making fraudulent claims about light cigarettes. According to Professor Connolly of Harvard, the tobacco industry has known for at least a decade from World Health Organization actions that words like âlightâ would eventually have to come off the boxes, giving it time to prepare the other visual cues on packaging.
He shared with The New York Times a set of marketing materials about the new color system that he said had been given to him by people working in the tobacco industry.
The color coding, Professor Connolly said, is red and dark green for regular and menthol; blue, gold and light green for light cigarettes; and silver and orange for ultra lights.
âThe myth of safer cigarettes is perpetuated,â Professor Connolly said. âLight cigarettes unleashed a monster.â
But rather than fight over shading and coloring on the packages, he urged the F.D.A., using its new authority, to regulate filters and ingredients in those cigarettes to make them taste harsher.
Light cigarettes have a different taste because they are filtered differently and may contain additives, Professor Connolly said. Studies have shown that people who smoke light cigarettes satisfy their nicotine cravings by inhaling the smoke more deeply, smoking more cigarettes and taking more puffs on each cigarette.
Altria said it had used terms like âlightâ as well as packaging colors to connote different tastes, not safety. But study after study â including ones by the industry disclosed in tobacco lawsuits â has shown consumers believe the terms and colors connote a safer product.
Moreover, adults believe cigarette packs with the terms âsmooth,â âsilverâ or âgoldâ are also easier to quit than other ones, and teenagers said they were more likely to try them, according to a survey and study published in September in the European Journal of Public Health.
The survey authors, led by David Hammond, a health studies professor at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, called for plain, uncolored packaging.
List Of Marlboro Cigarettes
Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, a Washington advocacy group, said cigarette companies had responded to bans of terms like âlightâ and âlow tarâ in at least 78 countries by color-coding their packaging to convey the same ideas.
âIf the F.D.A. concludes that either new wording or color coding is misleading consumers,â he said, âthen the F.D.A. has authority to take corrective action.â
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |