322 



79 - 



years of U.S. Government reports: Carlton Is still 

 lowest!' (CARLTON, 4/4/88 People Magazine ) 



The only logical reason for these advertisements to even discuss the 

 low tar and nicotine Issue is to encourage health conscious consumers 

 to use these products. As the National Research Council of the 

 Natlcna^ Acadwy of Science concluded in Its 1982 Report, Reduced Tar 

 an d f<1cotlne Cigarettes: Smoking Behavl-jr and Health; the focus of 

 t.ie report was dn the less hazardous c'garette: 



"first, because there are adequate scientific 

 reports to evaluate this method as a health 

 strategy for smokers; 



second, because It has unquestionably been the 

 major direction of consumer Interest, commercial 

 development and governmental activity in this 

 country... and finally, 



because experiments with different types of 



cigarettes have provided the opportunity to assess 

 the role of nicotine In t he motivation to continue 

 smoking ." (p.!) 



These types of promotions cited above and the conclusion of the NAS and 

 other studies clearly demonstrate that the low tar and nicotine 

 cigarettes ere intended to affect the function and structure of the 

 body. It is not necessary that the Intended purposes be explicitly 

 stated. Both the FOCA and case law have established that "the intended 

 use of the product is not limited to the label on the container but may 

 extend to oral and written representations as well." As the U.S. Court 

 of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit said. "The ultimate Impression upon 



"X 



