Vipin Jain1, Aleksandra Alcheva1, Darlene Huang1, Rosalie Caruso1, Anshu Jain1, Mula Lay1, Richard O'Connor1, Irina Stepanov1. 1. Vipin Jain, Research Associate, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Aleksandra Alcheva, Graduate Student, Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Darlene Huang, Senior Associate, O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC. Rosalie Caruso, Senior Research Associate, Tobacco Research Laboratory, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY. Anshu Jain, Research Scientist, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Mula Lay, Student Intern, Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. Richard O'Connor, Professor, Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY. Irina Stepanov, Associate Professor, Masonic Cancer Center and Division of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Marketing of the Natural American Spirit (NAS) cigarettes implies reduced risk of toxic exposures. We aimed to provide a comprehensive chemical characterization of these cigarettes. METHODS: We analyzed 13 varieties of NAS for a range of tobacco- and combustion-derived constituents. Cigarettes were smoked by 2 standard regimens and analyzed using our routine analytical procedures. We also analyzed tobacco filler and physical cigarette characteristics. RESULTS: Under intense smoking conditions, nicotine in smoke of NAS cigarettes averaged 3.3(±0.7) mg/cigarette, compared to 2.4(±0.4) in other brands. The levels of carcinogenic nitrosamines NNN and NNK varied extensively across NAS varieties, their sum ranging from 71 to 443 ng/cigarette. Levels of volatile toxicants were generally similar to, or higher than those found in other commercial US cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: High nicotine content suggests that NAS cigarettes may be more addictive than many other brands. Similarly low TSNA levels were measured in some NAS varieties, independent of whether or not they were labeled as organic. Levels of other toxicants were similar to other brands. Consumer education and additional regulatory measures are needed to address the misperceptions that NAS cigarettes are safer than other commercial cigarette brands.
OBJECTIVES: Marketing of the Natural American Spirit (NAS) cigarettes implies reduced risk of toxic exposures. We aimed to provide a comprehensive chemical characterization of these cigarettes. METHODS: We analyzed 13 varieties of NAS for a range of tobacco- and combustion-derived constituents. Cigarettes were smoked by 2 standard regimens and analyzed using our routine analytical procedures. We also analyzed tobacco filler and physical cigarette characteristics. RESULTS: Under intense smoking conditions, nicotine in smoke of NAS cigarettes averaged 3.3(±0.7) mg/cigarette, compared to 2.4(±0.4) in other brands. The levels of carcinogenic nitrosamines NNN and NNK varied extensively across NAS varieties, their sum ranging from 71 to 443 ng/cigarette. Levels of volatile toxicants were generally similar to, or higher than those found in other commercial US cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: High nicotine content suggests that NAS cigarettes may be more addictive than many other brands. Similarly low TSNA levels were measured in some NAS varieties, independent of whether or not they were labeled as organic. Levels of other toxicants were similar to other brands. Consumer education and additional regulatory measures are needed to address the misperceptions that NAS cigarettes are safer than other commercial cigarette brands.
Entities:
Keywords:
Natural American Spirit cigarettes; analysis; harmful constituents; tobacco smoke
Authors: Selvin H Edwards; Lana M Rossiter; Kenneth M Taylor; Matthew R Holman; Liqin Zhang; Yan S Ding; Clifford H Watson Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Irina Stepanov; Peter W Villalta; Aleksandar Knezevich; Joni Jensen; Dorothy Hatsukami; Stephen S Hecht Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Yan S Ding; Liqin Zhang; Ram B Jain; Ntasha Jain; Richard Y Wang; David L Ashley; Clifford H Watson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Andrew C Harris; Peter Muelken; Aleksandra Alcheva; Irina Stepanov; Mark G LeSage Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 5.152