Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 7 
incentive to the industry that may serve people. Drs. Benowitz and 
Kozlowski and I had this embedded in our Journal of the American Medical 
Association proposal: the notion that right now, in our estimation, virtually 
all cigarettes you throw into the regular category, but by providing the 
incentive to get that label of low, which could be a really nice selling point 
and may be of health benefit, you would have to work to redesign cigarettes 
in such a way that 1 think would be useful, and what you would have to 
do is redesign them in a way that would make sure that the upper level was 
lower. And that brings me again to the reason that I think we need some 
bioavailability testing. 1 agree with Dr. Benowitz, not necessarily on 900 
brands, but you need to anchor it at some point to what people get, and you 
need an agency that can oversee that properly and also require it on demand; 
that is the only way you are going to prevent another Barclay cigarette type 
of scam, the notion that somebody comes up with a design that seems to 
meet the low category, and they have just done it by beating the machine. 
The only way you are going to check that is by seeing what people get. 
DR. GUERIN: Dr. Henningfield, as a good example, the FTC test is what 
discovered the Barclay scheme. The FTC test has been successful in 
identifying those kinds of problems. 
DR. SHIFFMAN: Dr. Henningfield, I take that perhaps as an additional 
proposal that you address a different issue than we have been talking about, 
which is the use of words like "light, low, ultralight" in advertising and the 
importance of making those accurate and not deceptive or confusing to the i 
consumer, and that I think is something we ought to address. That the | 
information that is presented to the public in advertising goes beyond the 
small numbers printed in the corner to the large "light," "ultralight," "low" 
printed in bold print, and I think that is something we ought to look at. I 
DR. HENNINGFIELD: Yes, I think those words should be banned. j 
DR. SHIFFMAN: I would disagree that they should be banned. They should 
be regulated so that they are accurate. 
DR. FREEMAN: Dr. Rickert? ' 
DR. RICKERT: I think it is obvious that many consumers choose their brands 
on the basis of some perceived risk to health, and it is also obvious that the 
ITC numbers do not and never were designed for that particular purpose. ^ 
1 share Dr. Hoffmann's concern in that our measure of dose is often based on j 
nicotine, which may or may not tell us about other constituents in tobacco ; 
smoke. Specifically, at the level of molecular epidemiology, there are certain i 
constituents that now can be tracked, and Dr. Hoffmann has mentioned i 
NNK in urine. There is the constituent 4-amino-biphenyl, which is present [ 
in tobacco smoke and which in smokers ends up as a hemoglobin adduct. | 
I here is, also, bcnzo(fl)pyrene, which in smokers ends up being bound to 
albumin. So, there are a number of traceal)lc constituents in tobacco smoke ■ 
that have known toxic or carcinogenic properties, which also then can be i 
related to uptake in smokers and nonsmokers alike. | 
212 
