Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 7 
really convey the exposure that occurs because of compensation. So, to me 
the answer to the first question is pretty clear. The current system must be 
changed in some way. 
DR. TOWNSEND: 1 do not understand your comment that cigarettes today 
are a more homogeneous group. From the data 1 showed yesterday the 
spread in tar deliveries in 1954 was really quite narrow. Cigarettes were 
really quite similar then. Today there is a huge range of products available 
to the consumer. 1 see that as less homogeneous. 
DR. WOOSLEY: 1 was referring to the potential range of intake, not the range 
that the tobacco industry provided us. 
DR. RICKERT: One of the things that people are concerned about is the fact 
that consumers tend to misinterpret the information. One of the ways of 
coming to grips with this problem is to deal with a range of potential values 
rather than specific numbers. This problem was first noted, I think, back 
in the 1981 Surgeon General's report when at that time there was a call for 
publishing maximal values in addition to the values that are obtained under 
FTC methodology. A more recent paper in 1994 has called for the same 
approach, and 1 think serious consideration should be given to this question 
of range, how one might express these upper limits, and if maximum were 
to be used, how that maximum would be determined. 
DR. GUERIN: If one examines Question 1 that we are addressing, the 
question says, "Is there any evidence that changes are needed in the current 
ITC protocol for measuring tar and nicotine and CO?" I have not necessarily 
seen much evidence for changes in measuring it, but a lot of reasons for 
changes in how we communicate it. Do we have to change the testing 
protocol to achieve this, or do we have to have a better way of 
communicating? 
DR. WOOSLEY: It says, "Constituent yields," and 1 think the yield from that 
method is probably inadequate. We need data on the yield to the smoker. 
DR. ZACNY: 1 just want to go back to something that Dr. Townsend said 
about 5 minutes ago and that we spent some time on yesterday when he 
showed charts where you increase puff volume from, 1 guess 35 to 55 mL, 
and the relative rankings would not change if puff volume were increased 
across the different yields. 1 think things change when you talk about filter 
vent blocking and maybe altering parameters for extensive filter vent 
blocking because there is a fundamental difference between lower yield 
cigarettes and high-yield cigarettes. 
I he high-yield cigarettes do not have filter vents, and so you could, 
by manipulating this parameter, turn a low-yield cigarette into a high-yield 
cigarette; the relative rankings then would not be preserved. 
DR. FREEMAN: Dr. Rickert? 
204 
