Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 7 
to assist consumers in making informed decisions would be to fully 
disclose the tobacco smoke constituents of potential health significance, 
analogous to harmful constituent disclosure of foods" (Henningfield et al., 
1994, pp. 312-313). 
The new nutritional labels mandated by the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) on all packaged foods contain information on a 
wide array of vitamins, minerals, cholesterol, total fat, and saturated fat. 
These labels reflect the product's characteristics. They make no pretense 
that any two individuals will eat breakfast cereal in the same way. Nor 
do they imply that each and every consumer will understand or want to 
understand each and every entry on the label. 
In the same way, the author has designed a "mock" cigarette label 
(Figure 1) to indicate what such an FDA-style label for cigarettes might look 
like. This is a sample and is not intended to reflect any current brand on the 
market. The opening box gives an explanation as well as a warning about 
the ways in which a smoker can obtain higher yields by changing his or her 
style of smoking. Then some "basic cigarette facts" would be included, such 
as length, type of filter, and weight of tobacco. In addition to data on the 
range of yields of tar (total particulates less nicotine) and nicotine, the label 
would show the range of yields of important smoke chemicals. 
The concept of full disclosure of cigarette characteristics is entirely 
consistent with the current Federal Trade Commission (FTC) method. In 
fact, the current FTC measurements of tar, nicotine, and CO are included 
in the proposed mock label. In addition, as we move to an era where both 
short- and long-term biological testing have become commonplace in 
industry, one might imagine a rating system based on the Ames test, skin 
painting, and other studies. Illustrative results for such biological testing 
are included in the mock label. 
One might object that such detailed disclosure of cigarette characteristics 
will confuse the smoker. Such an assertion is unscientific and unfair. To 
publish a label that discloses, for example, the tobacco-specific nitrosamine 
contents of a particular brand of cigarettes is no more confusing or 
complicated than printing a label that discloses the riboflavin and potassium 
yields of a particular brand of breakfast cereal. It would be remarkable 
to discover cereal manufacturers or consumer advocates arguing that the 
vitamin contents or trace metal levels of cereals should be withheld from 
consumers because vitamin E and zinc levels might correlate — at least 
roughly — with dietary fiber contents. 
Iiid 
I'o a limited degree, researchers have studied consumers' responses to 
advertised tar and nicotine ratings of cigarettes. But there are no data — at 
least in the public domain — on the possible effects of providing consumers 
with additional cigarette-specific information of the type considered in the 
mock label. 
68 
