317 



- 74 - 



" If Claimants labeling w«s such that 1t created in the 

 m\n6 of the pubHc the idea that these cigarettes 

 could be used for the wUiqation or prevention 0/ tKe 

 various named diseases, claimant cannot now be heard 

 to say that it ls selling only cigarettes and not 

 drugs... Tht ultimate impression upon the mind of' the 

 reader arises from the sum total of not only ^'hat Is 

 said, but also aii that is reasonably implied. If 

 claimant wishes to reap the reward of such claims let 

 it bear the responsibility as Congress has seen fit to 

 Impose on it." (Emphasis added) 113 F. Supp at 3j8- 

 339. 



3. Co^arative advertising and proaotlon activities which 

 distinguish varying levels of nicotine and f r dcaonstrtU 

 the intent of the cigarette tnufacturers to —rket thcs< 

 products as products Intended to affect the structure or 

 functions of the body thus aectinq the definitional 

 requireaents of 'drugs.' 



In addition to meeting the definitional requirements of Section 201 (g) 

 (1) (B). low tar and low nicotine cigarettes also dearly meet the 

 definition*! and legal requirements of Section 201 {g)(l) (C), 

 "articles Intended to affect the structure or any function of the body 

 of man or other animals." 



There can be no question that for reasons noted elsewhere in this 

 petition, today's low tar and nicotine cigarettes are not the same 

 product that appeared on the market in the 20' s, 30' s, and 40' s. 



