Talks about cigarette contents

Here about contents of cigarette.

The smoke from a cigarette contains more than 4000 chemicals, which could have various toxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic effects. The content and concentration of chemical ingredients can vary

widely from one brand or type of cigarette to the next. 
Below is a list of few of the chemicals and their harmful effects . 
Acetone            Cyanide 
Aluminum           DDT/Dieldrin 
Ammonia            Ethenol 
Arsenic              Formaldehyde 
Benzene             Hydrogen cyanide 
Butane               Lead 
Cadmium             Methanol 
Carbon monoxide  Nicotine 
Carbon dioxide     Tar 
Chloroform          Vinyl Chloride

Talks about electronic cigarettes.

Above about electronic cigarettes.

The electronic cigarettes include the latest emulation technology. The atomized solution apparently produces voluminous white “smoke” for the user to exhale, just like the real thing. Take a look at an image from one of the marketing sites for this product.

There’s an amber LED in the tip of this product that glows when you use it, to emulate the glowing ember of a burning cigarette. Since the actual user can’t see this LED indicator, I must presume its presence is for the benefit of the nearby innocent bystanders.

And just like the real thing, you can get the electronic cigarette’s nicotine solution in a variety of yummy flavors including tobacco, strawberry, orange, mint, vanilla, caramel, and coffee.

The electronic cigarette contains a rechargeable lithium battery, an atomizer for the liquid solution contained in the nicotine cartridge, and an electronic airflow sensor to activate the atomizer and the amber LED indicator. There’s even a USB charger for the product.

Despite being marketed as a “healthier” alternative to the real thing, the US FDA has found carcinogens in the atomized vapor from the nicotine cartridges. Many countries have already banned the products for related reasons.

Content of tar and nicotine

Here the content of tar and nicotine.

CIGARETTE BRAND
TYPE
TAR
NICOTINE

CARTIER Vendome
Filter
8 mg
0.8 mg

CARTIER Vendome Menthol
Filter
8 mg
0.8 mg

COURTLEIGH 120 Slims
Filter
14 mg
1.4 mg

COURTLEIGH
Filter
14 mg
1.3 mg

DUNHILL International
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

DUNHILL Menthol Mild
Filter
10 mg
0.9 mg

DUNHILL King Size Lights
Filter
9 mg
0.8 mg

DUNHILL Infinate Lights
Filter
9 mg
0.8 mg

DUNHILL Ultra Lights
Filter
5 mg
0.5 mg

DUNHILL King Size
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

MATRIX
Filter
14 mg
1.0 mg

MATRIX Lights
Filter
10 mg
1.8 mg

BENSON & HEDGES Gold
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

BENSON & HEDGES Special Mild
Filter
10 mg
1.0 mg

BENSON & HEDGES Ultra Mild
Filter
6 mg
0.6 mg

BENSON & HEDGES Menthol Mild
Filter
10 mg
1.0 mg

BENSON & HEDGES Ultimate Light
Filter
4 mg
0.4 mg

BENSON & HEDGES No.1
Filter
1 mg
0.1 mg

BROTHER
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

CAMEL
Filter
15 mg
1.1 mg

CAMEL Light
Filter
8 mg
0.7 mg

CAMEL Mild
Filter
13 mg
1.0 mg

CAMEL
Non-Filter
18 mg
1.4 mg

JOHN PLAYERS King Size
Filter
15 mg
1.0 mg

GAULOISES
Filter
12 mg
0.7 mg

GAULOISES Blondes
Filter
15 mg
1.1 mg

GAULOISES Legres Grey
Filter
9 mg
0.4 mg

GAULOISES Legres Red
Filter
5 mg
0.8 mg

GITANES
Filter
12 mg
0.7 mg

LUCKY STRIKE
Filter
12 mg
0.9 mg

LUCKY STRIKE Lights
Filter
9 mg
0.7 mg

CHESTERFIELD
Filter
13 mg
1.0 mg

CHESTERFIELD Lights
Filter
9 mg
0.7 mg

CHESTERFIELD
Non-Filter
17 mg
1.5 mg

CONSULATE
Filter
16 mg
1.3 mg

SATIN LEAF
Filter
11 mg
1.0 mg

SATIN LEAF Ultra
Filter
5 mg
0.5 mg

SATIN LEAF Ultra 1 mg
Filter
1 mg
0.1 mg

SATIN LEAF Ultra Menthol
Filter
5 mg
0.5 mg

SATIN LEAF Absolute Lights
Filter
3 mg
0.3 mg

CRAVEN A 120 Menthol
Filter
15 mg
1.3 mg

CRAVEN A
Filter
15 mg
1.3 mg

GUNSTON
Filter
17 mg
1.5 mg

JOHN ROLFE King Size
Filter
14 mg
1.2 mg

JOHN ROLFE Lights
Filter
7 mg
0.7 mg

LEXINGTON
Filter
17 mg
1.4 mg

LEXINGTON Lights
Filter
12 mg
1.1 mg

MILLS
Filter
17 mg
1.5 mg

PALL MALL
Filter
12 mg
1.1 mg

PALL MALL Super Lights
Filter
6 mg
0.6 mg

PETER STUYVESANT
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

PETER STUYVESANT Extra Mild
Filter
9 mg
0.8 mg

PAUL REVERE
Filter
14 mg
1.2 mg

ROTHMANS King Size
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

ROTHMANS King Size Special Mild
Filter
12 mg
1.1 mg

VAN RIJN
Filter
16 mg
1.5 mg

VAN RIJN Special Mild
Filter
12 mg
1.1 mg

VOGUE Slims 100
Filter
5 mg
0.5 mg

VOGUE
Filter
10 mg
1.1 mg

WINFIELD
Filter
14 mg
1.2 mg

WINFIELD Lights
Filter
10 mg
1.1 mg

WINSTON
Filter
15 mg
1.3 mg

WINSTON Lights
Filter
8 mg
0.7 mg

FORUM
Filter
13 mg
0.7 mg

FORUM Mild
Filter
9 mg
0.6 mg

FORUM Estate
Filter
14 mg
1.0 mg

FORUM Menthol
Filter
13 mg
0.7 mg

EMBASSY King Size
Filter
15 mg
1.5 mg

EMBASSY Lights
Filter
11 mg
1.0 mg

EMBASSY Menthol
Filter
15 mg
1.5 mg

ROYALS Red
Filter
15 mg
1.4 mg

ROYALS Light
Filter
11 mg
1.0 mg

ROYALS Menthol
Filter
13 mg
0.7 mg

RIVAS PARK
Filter
15 mg
1.2 mg

SAHAWI
Filter
12 mg
1.0 mg

SAHAWI Super Lights
Filter
8 mg
0.7 mg

SHARP
Filter
14 mg
1.2 mg

KINGSTON King Size
Filter
11 mg
1.0 mg

YES
Filter
16 mg
1.0 mg

Facts about cigarettes

Above about cigarettes.

Cigarettes damage the body--gradually and insidiously--in a number of different ways. Over the years, the American Council on Science and Health and others have documented the effects. One popular argument the scientific community often makes to encourage smokers to quit stems from the conjecture that all of the health effects of smoking are reversible shortly after cessation, regardless of the duration or intensity of the smoking exposure. Unfortunately, this conjecture is not true. Teenagers, in particular, may be overly complacent about smoking because they believe--incorrectly--that they can smoke for a few years and then quit without suffering any long-term effects. This complacency is especially troubling in light of the recent finding, reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that teen smoking rates have increased by nearly a third within the last six years.

Teen smokers who believe that all the health hazards of cigarettes will disappear in a puff of smoke when they quit--who assume that smoking from, say, age 16 to age 28 will have no long-term effects--often fall back on an "I can always quit tomorrow" (or next month or next year) philosophy. They trust--mistakenly--that any adverse health consequences they may incur during their smoking years will disappear when, eventually, they stop lighting up. But another recent study has reported that the quitting success rate among teenagers is very low: Less than 16 percent of the 633 teen smokers in the study were able to kick the habit.

Tightens rules on tobacco componies

Here about government tightens rules on tobacco companies.

President Obama recently signed into law the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which grants the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products, as well as putting restrictions on tobacco marketing and advertising.

The FDA will now be able to reduce the nicotine content and regulate the chemicals in cigarettes. Tobacco companies will no longer be allowed to target children by adding flavors, other than menthol, to cigarettes in order to improve taste and make them seem more appealing.

Tobacco advertising will be limited to black-and-white-only text, and outdoor advertising within 1,000 feet of schools will be prohibited. Within the next three years, tobacco companies will no longer be able to use words like "light" or "low tar" on cigarette packaging, as these terms create the illusion that certain cigarettes are safer. There is no such thing as a safe cigarette. Period.

The goal of Big Tobacco is to get people hooked on their products so they gain a "client-for-life." Currently, there are over 1,000 new daily smokers under the age of 18 every day in the United States. The objective of the tobacco control act is to protect America's youth from ever starting smoking. It should also benefit current smokers by moderating the kind of chemicals that are added to tobacco to manipulate the chemistry and make it more addictive.

What are your thoughts about the government creating the tobacco control act and imposing such regulations on the tobacco industry?

Smoking less won’t reduce cancer risk

Above about tar cigarettes.

The notion of tobacco harm reduction—that there may be a "safer" way to smoke—is one that holds great appeal for smokers unwilling or unable to kick the habit and for the tobacco companies that profit from it. But two recent studies add weight to the argument that quitting is still the only certain way to reduce the health risks of tobacco.

The first, published in BMJ (2004;328:72–80), compared lung cancer risk among smokers of high-tar, regular-tar, and reduced-tar cigarettes. Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the ACS found that low-tar and very low-tar cigarettes were no less harmful than those with regular or medium-tar levels.

"The data underscore that terms like ‘light’ and ‘ultra light’ are misleading because they imply less health risk but do not correspond to less hazardous cigarettes," said coauthor Michael J. Thun, MD, MS, Vice President of Epidemiology and Surveillance Research at ACS.

Nearly 1 million men and women (nonsmokers, former cigarette smokers, and current cigarette smokers) participating in the ACS Cancer Prevention Study II were analyzed. The tar rating of the brand of cigarette smoked in 1982 was compared with mortality from cancer of the lung, trachea, or bronchus over the next six years. Cigarettes were categorized as "very low tar" (0 to 7 mg tar per cigarette), "low tar" (8 to 14 mg tar per cigarette), "medium tar" (15 to 21 mg tar per cigarette), or "high tar" (22 mg or more per cigarette). The statistical analyses controlled for factors including age, race, education, marital status, diet, occupation (including asbestos exposure), and cardiovascular or respiratory comorbidities.

As expected, people who never smoked had virtually no risk of lung cancer. Those who smoked high-tar brands (which typically are unfiltered) had the highest risk; compared with current smokers of medium-tar cigarettes, their hazard ratios were 1.44 for men and 1.64 for women.

But lung cancer risk among people who smoked low-tar or very low-tar cigarettes was indistinguishable from that of smokers of medium-tar brands. Hazard ratios were 1.17 and 1.02 among men smoking very low-tar and low-tar brands, respectively, and 0.98 and 0.95, respectively, among women. None of these values were significantly different from the hazard ratio for smokers of medium-tar brands (set at 1.0 for this statistical analysis).

The way people smoke is the likeliest explanation for the findings, Thun said. The tar and nicotine content listed on cigarette labels is based on measurements from a smoking machine, but studies have shown "there’s a very poor correlation between machine-measured yield and what people are actually taking in," he explained.

People who smoke reduced-tar cigarettes don’t necessarily lower the amount of chemicals they inhale because they tend to inhale deeper, hold the smoke longer, and puff more often than smokers of regular-tar brands. They also tend to smoke more and may, inadvertently or not, cover ventilation holes in the cigarette filter that are designed to dilute the smoke with air.

Compensation in smoking behavior is also the most likely explanation for the findings of a second study examining the effect of smoking fewer cigarettes on the level of carcinogens in the body. Researchers from the University of Minnesota Cancer Center Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (2004;96:107–115) that smoking fewer cigarettes did not result in a proportional reduction in metabolites of the carcinogen 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK).

"The reduction was just not as great as you would have expected based on how much [the study participants] had cut back," said lead researcher Stephen Hecht, PhD.

Hecht and colleagues enrolled more than 150 people who smoked, on average, 23.7 cigarettes a day. The study involved gradual cigarette reduction using nicotine replacement therapy and brief counseling sessions. At each stage of the program, urinary levels of the NNK metabolites 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) and NNAL glucuronides (NNAL-Gluc) were measured. The reductions in these biomarkers did not keep pace with the reductions in cigarettes.

Cutting cigarette consumption by 53% led to a reduction of only 29% in NNAL and NNAL-Gluc. Cutting cigarettes by 75% caused only a 37% drop in the chemicals. Even people who cut back to just 2.6 cigarettes a day, a reduction of 90%, lowered their levels of NNAL and NNAL-Gluc by only 46%.

Although these reductions in carcinogens were statistically significant, for most smokers the effect was modest and transient, Hecht said. As the study went on, NNAL and NNAL-Gluc increased again in many participants, even though they were still smoking fewer cigarettes. Compensatory smoking is probably the reason.

Thun and Hecht said their findings support the notion that giving up cigarettes entirely is the best bet for reducing the health risks caused by tobacco. In the first study, quitting reduced lung cancer risk substantially; people who gave up smoking before age 35 had almost the same lung cancer risk as nonsmokers, but even those who quit after age 55 saw a substantial reduction. Hecht has done previous research showing that levels of NNAL and NNAL-Gluc gradually decrease and eventually become undetectable in people who quit smoking.

Moreover, no product or strategy designed to reduce the harm from smoking has yet been shown to work, Hecht said

"I still think cessation is the way to go, clearly," he said. "We don’t have conclusive evidence that anything else works."

Tar cigarettes effect lungs

Here’s about tar cigarettes effect lung when your smoking.

Are you suffering with a smoker’s cough that won’t go away? Have you been smoking cigarettes for five, ten, or twenty years and find it difficult or impossible to kick the habit? Do you find it hard to breathe deeply? If you answered yes to one or more of the questions above, these are all evidence that your lungs are dirty and need to be cleaned out. And in this situation, you are probably asking yourself, ‘Can I clean my lungs?’ The answer is yes. In this article you will discover how to clean your lungs simply and painlessly, in the comfort of your home, no matter how long you’ve been a smoker.

But first, a little background. Your lungs lungs are terribly fragile organs. And if you have been a cigarette smoker for a few of years, you do damage to your lungs each day. One of the most dangerous substances in cigarettes is tar. With each cigarette you smoke, you inhale tar into your lungs. If you’ve got a nagging smoker’s cough, you probably have smoking damaged lungs. If that is the case, you need to clean this nasty chemical out your lungs.

Your lungs are covered with really fragile thin strands that clean your lungs, called cilia. Over a period of years, tar begins to coat the cilia and disables your lung’s cleaning system. In the lungs of a smoker, there are significantly less healthy cilia to do the job of keeping your lungs clean. As a consequence, the surviving cilia can’t clean out your lungs efficiently. When this occurs, your fragile air passages become clogged and you begin coughing.

So, again, we examine the question, ‘How can i clean my lungs’? In the section that follows, there are several lung detox techniques that are effective for many.

If a mucous build-up is causing you to have a chronic cough, you should avoid foods like milk and milk products. Eat foods that reduce mucous build-up. These foods include fresh garlic, cayenne pepper, fresh ginger, onion, fresh ground black pepper, and horse radish.

Drink carrot juice with each meal. Your body converts the beta carotene into vitamin A. And vitamin A is a vital nutrient that helps to maintain your lungs.

But these remedies will do little to help you quit smoking. However, there is a lung detox system that will not only clean your lungs, it will make you want to quit smoking. People worldwide have reported that this miracle lung detox system helped them quit smoking without any of nasty withdrawal symptoms. It works by employing a little known combination of supplements to clean your lungs. Download my new lung detox system today to Clean Your Lungs! and start breathing easier!

Smoking can cause cancer

Above about hazard of smoking.

Smoking is the cause of several kinds of cancer. This includes lung, mouth, throat, stomach, bladder and colon cancer.

Lung cancer is the most common form of cancer that exists in smokers. Research had shows that approximately 1 in 4 smokers will contracted with lung cancer. The tobacco smoke is made up from various dangerous chemical substances.

There is over 60 of these substances that cause cancer. The chemical that causes cancer are found in the tobacco tar. When a smoker take in the cigarette smoke, 70% of the tar will stays in the lung of the smoker .

A carcinogen called Benzpyrene which is found in the cigarette smoke damage the genes in your body and can cause cancerous growth. The chemicals and toxins that is derived from the smoke of the cigarettes encourages the lung tissues to develop cancerous cells.

There are two types of tumors which are benign or malignant tumor. Benign tumors are not dangerous unless they are very large.

Benign tumors grow slowly over time and do not spread to other tissues in the body. Malignant tumors are the type of tumors that are cancerous. It can spread to other parts of the body.

Malignant tumors can cause death by reproducing erratically and destroying the surrounding tissues and spreading to other organs in the body.

There are two kinds of lung cancer which are on-small lung cancers and small cell lung cancers. Small cell lung cancer is the most aggressive type of lung cancer related to smoking.

Symptoms of lung cancer includes constant coughing, coughing up blood, shortness of breath, chest pains, massive weight loss , appetite loss, bronchitis, and pneumonia and swelling the neck and face.

Stop smoking now and live a healthy lifestyle. It is very important that a recovering patient never smoke again as this can trigger the growth of cancer cells.

Smoking is terribly addictive, but it is a fight that can be won.

If you’re getting serious about quitting, one stop smoking program, Ciggarrest might be worth a try.

The first couple of weeks is believed to the hardest part of quitting. That dreadful withdrawal symptoms can be quite unbearable, if not dealt with properly.

Smoking cessation program like Ciggarest help you deal with the stress and pain of qutting, especially in that first couple of weeks.

The success of its program is largely due to its use of all natural, non-addictive products that helps permanently break both the physical and psychological addictions and reduces the symptoms of withdrawal, thus reducing the cravings for cigarettes.

Whether you are still smoking, just starting to quit or are a successful ex-smoker, it’s recommended that you watch this Ciggarrest video and discover why Ciggarest is by far the best program to quit smoking.

Effect of tar cigarettes.

Here are the effect of smoking.

Smokers are more than 5 times as likely as nonsmokers to develop abdominal aortic aneurysms. (Reuters March 2004)

Nicotine can trigger palpitations. (Longevity, May 1991)

Among people over 65, smokers have four to eight times the risk of an aneurysm than the average person’s risk: those with high blood pressure have double the risk. (“Deceptive Pain,” Discover magazine, Jan. 2001)

Smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke both significantly hasten hardening of the arteries, and the damage may be permanent, says a study at Wake Forest University. (“Smoking linked to hardening of the arteries,” AP, The Daily Progress, Charlottesville, Virginia, Jan. 14, 1998)

Smoking may account for a 50% increase in the development of arteriosclerosis (the buildup of plaque along arterial walls) for current smokers, and 25% for past smokers. (Delicious! magazine, May 1998)

In the winter, smokers may be at an increased risk of heart disease due to higher blood pressure and heart rate, say researchers in Israel. Although winter blood pressure readings are typically higher for most people, in smokers the average increase in systolic blood pressure was twice the increase in non-smokers. (“Cold Weather Raises Heart Risk for Smokers,” heartinfo.org - June 2001)

Smoking damages the arteries to the heart and brain, thereby increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke. ( British Medical Journal 1996, in Health Gazette newsletter, Feb. 1997)

Cigarette smoking harms the body by raising cholesterol levels and blood pressure. (“Addictive Substances: Nicotine,” Let’s Live magazine, Oct. 1996)

One cigarette can impair circulation for up to 45 minutes by constricting the small blood vessels. (The narrow vessels in the feet are particularly vulnerable to the damaging effects). (Hara Podiatrist Group, Covina, Ca., Prevention magazine, Dec. 1987)

Issues for better financial future

 

Above about issues today with the smoker and cigarettes.

When you think of the big issues in life, what do you think of? Global warming?, Social Change?, Health?,  there are probably too many to mention!

Two of the biggest issues of today must be financial security and social change. In a world where the first African-American President is elected we are living admidst changing times. Not least dealing with a recession not seen since the Great depression of the 30’s, where job safety is non existent and  where you are more likely to have to accept a pay cut rather than a rise, just to keep your job.

More social change came for the 35% of the population in the form of tabacco taxes that saw smokers get hit harder than most at a time when you probably need an extra couple of cigarettes a day to cope with the added stresses of our time! Add to this the ever-widening bans in public places and you have to agree, the smoker is fast becoming an endagered species.

Well, as with most stories of the underdog, smokers have found a way to start to fight back and make money whilst doing it helping to stem the attack from the Federal govt and there increase in taxes and putting an  income back in their pocket whether it be part-time or full time, bridging the gap between there salary and that pay cut or building a business after they were laid off.

Inlife are the leading brand of the new innovation, the electronic cigarette. A carcinogen free smoking experience that allows smokers to smoke in all those places where tabacco smoking is banned. You get the nicotine hit, the smoking experience but none of the tar etc that a normal cigarette provides.

On top of this, Inlife allows you to become a distributor, passing the word about e-cigarettes, building a business with the potential to take a big slice of the tabacco industry revenue. When it comes to markets and size, they don’t come much bigger than that.

In a marketplace this huge and with little competition, the Inlife opportunity allows you to build a distribution network quickly and easily. Smokers are 1 in 3 of us so you wont need to look far for help and sales.

Think smart and start replacing what you may have lost and then some.

Tar cigarettes relate to lung cancer

Here’s about tar cigarettes can cause lung cancer.

Irrespective of the tar level of their current brand, all current smokers had a far greater risk of lung cancer than people who had stopped smoking or had never smoked. Compared with smokers of medium tar (15-21 mg) filter cigarettes, risk was higher among men and women who smoked high tar ( 22 mg) non-filter brands (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.20 to 1.73, and 1.64, 1.26 to 2.15, respectively). There was no difference in risk among men who smoked brands rated as very low tar (1.17, 0.95 to 1.45) or low tar (1.02, 0.90 to 1.16) compared with those who smoked medium tar brands. The same was seen for women (0.98, 0.80 to 1.21, and 0.95, 0.82 to 1.11, respectively).

Conclusion The increase in lung cancer risk is similar in people who smoke medium tar cigarettes (15-21 mg), low tar cigarettes (8-14 mg), or very low tar cigarettes ( 7 mg). Men and women who smoke non-filtered cigarettes with tar ratings 22 mg have an even higher risk of lung cancer.

National Poster Tar Wars

Above about Tar Wars National Poster.

Tar Wars isn't just about teaching kids not to smoke. It's about teaching them to stay away from all forms of tobacco. And, at this time of year, it's about taking that critical message to federal lawmakers.

Tar Wars national poster contest winner Alexa Barrett, an 11-year-old from American Falls, Idaho, presents Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, with a copy of her poster. Barrett and 28 other state-level winners in the Tar Wars national poster contest visited legislators July 14 in Washington, D.C.

Alexa Barrett, an 11-year-old from American Falls, Idaho, was named the AAFP initiative's national poster contest winner on July 13 during the Tar Wars National Conference in Washington, D.C. Barrett's poster featured a drawing of a cow accompanied by the slogan, "Cows are smart, they don't chew, they moo."

"That's pretty unique," said Pam Rodriguez, AAFP's tobacco control manager. "I don't think we've had a poster focused on chewing tobacco. The posters' messages are usually about smoking, but Tar Wars is about preventing all kinds of tobacco use."

Family physicians and other health care workers across the country present Tar Wars tobacco-free education programs to fourth- and fifth-graders in their local schools each year, discussing the toll tobacco takes on health, as well as the financial costs of tobacco use. More than 8 million children have heard the tobacco-free message since the program's inception in 1988.

The program, which is supported by the AAFP Foundation and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, culminates each year with a national poster contest made up of submissions from state-level poster contest winners. As the 2009 national contest winner, Barrett will receive a family trip to Disney World in Orlando, Fla., worth as much as $3,000.

"The program has really taught me a lot, like what really is in cigarettes and smoke and what it can do to you," Barrett told AAFP News Now.

Rodriguez said 29 of 38 state poster contest winners and members of their families made the trip to Washington, D.C. After an awards ceremony on July 13, the children visited about 50 members of the House and Senate the following day, presenting their legislators with copies of their posters.

Tar in cigarettes harmful the smoker

Here's about tar in cigarettes.

Millions of Americans smoke "low-tar," "mild," or "light" cigarettes, believing those cigarettes to be less harmful than other cigarettes. In a new monograph from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) titled Risks Associated with Smoking Cigarettes with Low Machine-Measured Yields of Tar and Nicotine*, national scientific experts conclude that evidence does not indicate a benefit to public health from changes in cigarette design and manufacturing over the last 50 years.

"This report was made possible by the work and cooperation of scientists throughout the country," said Scott Leischow, Ph.D., chief of the NCI Tobacco Control Research Branch. "The monograph clearly demonstrates that people who switch to low-tar or light cigarettes from regular cigarettes are likely to inhale the same amount of cancer-causing toxins and they remain at high risk for developing smoking-related cancers and other diseases." This monograph is the 13^th volume in NCI's Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph Series, which began in 1991.

Public Health Effects

Epidemiologic studies (studies that examine the relationship of risk factors to health and disease) in the late 1960s and 1970s found that smokers of lower-tar or filtered cigarettes had somewhat lower lung cancer risks than smokers of other cigarettes. This finding was particularly noteworthy because smokers in these studies had been smoking the reduced-yield cigarettes for only a relatively short period of time. It was predicted that as more smokers used lower yield products for longer periods of time, a greater benefit would occur and national lung cancer death rates would fall.

Unfortunately, these reductions have not been seen. Even as the popularity of lower- yield cigarettes grew - 97 percent of the cigarettes now sold in the United States are filtered cigarettes - lung cancer rates continued to rise until the early 1990s. The monograph demonstrates that the overall decline that has been seen since the 1990s can be attributed to the decrease in smoking prevalence, and not to changes in cigarette design.

The new monograph reviews published literature on death rates in the U.S. and the United Kingdom which also demonstrated an increase - rather than a decrease - in smoking risks over a period when machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine were declining. Two studies conducted by the American Cancer Society more than 20 years apart found that, despite the large reduction in machine-measured tar yield over this period, smokers in the later study had an increased risk of lung cancer. This increase was seen even when differences in the number of cigarettes smoked per day and duration of smoking were factored into the analysis. The monograph clearly demonstrates that the expected reduction in lung cancer risk offered by the early epidemiologic studies has not been seen in national lung cancer death rate trends.

Surveys have indicated that among the estimated 47 million adults who smoke in the United States, people who are most concerned about smoking risks or are most interested in quitting use brands labeled "light" or "ultra-light." Unfortunately, the monograph finds that choosing lower-yield cigarettes is not likely to reduce tar intake and resulting disease risks. Furthermore, marketing and promotion of reduced yield products may delay genuine attempts to quit. There is no evidence that switching to light or ultra-light cigarettes actually assists smokers in quitting.

According to David M. Burns, M.D., senior scientific editor of the monograph and a professor at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine, "The take-home message of this report is that the only proven way to reduce the disease risks associated with smoking is to quit."

New Testing Method Needed

Currently, measurements of tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide are obtained by machine measurement using the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) testing method. However, studies now show that the FTC method does not appropriately mimic human smoking behavior. The monograph concludes that: "Measurements of tar and nicotine yields using the FTC method do not offer smokers meaningful information on the amount of tar and nicotine they will receive from a cigarette. The measurements also do not offer meaningful information on the relative amounts of tar and nicotine exposure likely to be received from smoking different brands of cigarettes."

According to Leischow, "There is an urgent need to develop new approaches to testing that offer meaningful information. Smokers should not believe that the tar and nicotine levels listed on a pack of cigarettes are what they are actually inhaling."

The FTC has asked the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) for guidance to improve its testing method for tar and nicotine. NCI and other DHHS agencies will convene a working group to review and synthesize the science on this issue and to determine what changes should be made to the testing method to correct the limitations identified in the monograph.

Smokers Compensate

The monograph describes several reasons why the levels of tar and nicotine measured by the FTC method do not reflect actual tar and nicotine delivery to the smoker. The filters in low-tar/low-nicotine cigarettes often include vent holes which, when open, allow air to enter and dilute the smoke. However, many smokers cover these holes with their lips and fingers. In contrast, when tested by a machine, the holes are unobstructed, and artificially low measurements of tar and nicotine are obtained. In addition, smokers who switch to low-tar or low-nicotine cigarettes from regular cigarettes "compensate" for the lower nicotine level by inhaling more deeply; taking larger, more rapid, or more frequent puffs; or by increasing the number of cigarettes smoked per day. As a result, smokers cancel out any potential benefit of smoking a "low-tar" cigarette.

The monograph describes the advertising and promotional strategies used by the tobacco industry to market lower-yield cigarettes. It concludes that these strategies were intended to reassure smokers and to prevent them from quitting, and that they led consumers to perceive filtered and low-tar products as safer alternatives to regular cigarettes. The monograph also cites internal tobacco industry documents that demonstrate the industry's early knowledge of the discrepancy between the FTC machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine and what the smoker actually inhales.

Future Research

The authors note that continued research, as well as tracking of the diseases caused by smoking, is necessary to determine the disease risks associated with recently introduced "reduced exposure" cigarettes or cigarette-like products. Further study on the health risks of individuals who have smoked only "low-yield," "ultra-low-yield," and "low-carcinogen" cigarettes is also needed.

Facts about tar

Above facts about tar.

Tar is the common name for the resinous partially combusted particulate matter produced by the burning of tobacco and other plant material in the act of smoking. Tar is purportedly^{[citation needed]} the most destructive component in habitual tobacco smoking, accumulating in the smoker's lungs over time and damaging them through various biochemical and mechanical processes. Tar also damages the mouth by rotting and blackening teeth, damaging gums and blocking papillae and taste buds.

Tar includes the majority of mutagenic and carcinogenic agents in tobacco smoke (IARC, 1986).^{[citation needed]} Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), for example, are genotoxic via epoxidation.^{[citation needed]}

There is a common misconception that the tar in cigarettes is equivalent to the tar used on roads.^{[citation needed]} As a result of this, cigarette companies in the United States, when prompted to give tar/nicotine ratings for cigarettes, usually use "tar", in quotation marks, to indicate that it is not the road surface component. Tar is occasionally referred to as an acronym for total aerosol residue^[1] although it's possible this is a backronym.^{[citation needed]}

The European Union currently limits the tar yield of cigarettes to 10mg.

Tar cigerettes affect health

Here's about how tar cigarettes can affect our health.


Amount of Tar

1. Cigarette tar refers to the toxic chemicals that are added during the production of tobacco cigarettes. Different cigarettes are given ratings based on the amount of tar they include. Cigarettes with the highest tar concentration have more than 22 mg of tar in each cigarette, while low-tar cigarettes have less than 7 mg in each. Tar can be found in a brown solid form at the end of a smoked cigarette.

Coloring Effects

2. Cigarette tar can show immediate health effects in terms of a smoker's appearance. The tar in cigarettes can stain smokers' teeth and turn them yellow and brown. In addition, cigarette tar can stain anything it touches brown, including a smoker's hands and clothing. Filters in tobacco cigarettes are intended to keep tar from exiting, but toxins still make it through and can leave a brown-yellow film behind.

Major Health Effects

3. The tar in tobacco cigarettes is a major cause of lung cancer, emphysema and bronchitis. The toxins from the tar can damage lung cells that keep tumors from forming. Cigarette tar also damages cilia in the lungs, which protect the lining of the lungs. In addition to the discoloring of teeth, tar can cause periodontitis, a gum disease that can result in the loss of teeth.

Tar cigarettes definition

Above about definition of tar cigarettes.

The term used to describe the toxic chemicals found in cigarettes. The concentration of tar in a cigarette determines its rating:

• High-tar cigarettes contain at least 22 milligrams (mg) of tar
• Medium-tar cigarettes from 15 mg to 21 mg
• Low-tar cigarettes 7 mg or less of tar