Philip Morris U.S.A. Corrects Congressman Waxman Again

Business Wire, August 2, 1995

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--August 2, 1995--In his latest attack on Philip Morris, Congressman Waxman, in concert with Congressmen Durbin and Meehan, seeks to perpetuate the myth that Congressman Waxman tried to create on Monday that the Benson & Hedges 70 mm cigarette, which was sold prior to 1985, had a "significantly increased" nicotine level according to the FTC report for March 1981. Congressman Waxman is wrong. And he knows it.

In fact, as indicated in the attached official FTC report for March 1981 -- the actual nicotine delivery of that particular ultra-low cigarette was only .12 mg. According to the FTC, the Benson & Hedges 70 mm cigarette tied as the second lowest cigarette out of the 187 tested that year in terms of nicotine delivery. Some "increase".

As the attached graph clearly shows, the truth about this particular cigarette was that both its tar and nicotine deliveries were reduced during the seven years from June 1970 through June 1977. In 1977, the cigarette was further reformulated as an ultra-low brand, and the already-reduced tar and nicotine levels were reduced again by 85-90%.

Mr. Waxman tries to hide these facts. Instead, he tries to shift the focus to minuscule variations up and down in the tar and nicotine delivery of that cigarette which occurred after 1978 until the brand was phased out in 1985 (when Philip Morris replaced it with other ultra-low products).

There were minor changes in tar and nicotine deliveries, as there always are as a result of growing conditions. But, as the attached graph of the data from the official FTC reports plainly shows, the nicotine delivery never rose again to anything even approaching the prior years; and that is why that brand tied for second lowest of the 187 brands tested by the FTC in March 1981 -- when Mr. Waxman claims its "nicotine-to-tar" ratios were "highest."

As for the comment of Dr. Cathy Ellis regarding the fluctuation in 1981, Dr. Ellis said the results might be the result of normal statistical variation in the testing methodology used by the FTC which would naturally be magnified (on a percentage basis) at lower nicotine levels. The variation also could be a result in climatic conditions because nicotine content in tobacco leaf varies from season to season based on the amount of rainfall.

Finally, with respect to Merit Ultra Light, the fact is that the slightly different nicotine-to-tar ratio of that low yield brand results from the fact that any ultra-low filter system takes out more of the tar than the nicotine. Again, if Mr. Waxman will study the FTC figures, he will see that that fact is reflected in virtually every low yield brand made by all cigarette companies.

For example, according to the FTC, in 1994 all of the following brands made by different manufacturers had the same 5 mg tar and .5 mg nicotine profile of Merit Ultra Light -- and thus the same "nicotine-to-tar" ratio of .10:

Austin Ultra Light Bargain Buy Ultra Light Bargain King Ultra Light Best Choice Ultra Light Best Value Ultra Light Bristol Ultra Light Camel Ultra Light Cardinal Ultra Light Carlton Light Cavalier Ultra Light Citation Ultra Light Cost Cutter Ultra Light (100mm) Directors Choice Ultra Light Doral Ultra Light Eve Slim Ultra Light (100mm) Extra Value Ultra Light Focus Ultra Light Highway Ultra Light Jacks Ultra Light Kent III Ultra Light (100mm) Kool Menthol (100mm) Marker Ultra Light Monarch Ultra Light Pilot Ultra Light Price Master Ultra Light Quality Smokes Ultra Light Salem Ultra Light Menthol (100mm) Scotch Buy Ultra Light Sebring Ultra Light Sundance Ultra Light Tareyton Light (King) Tri-Brand Ultra Light Value & Quality Ultra Light Value Buy Ultra Light Value Pride Ultra Light Value Sense Ultra Light Vantage Ultra Light (100mm) Winston Ultra Light Worth Ultra Light

Perhaps Mr. Waxman will now charge that all of the different companies who make all of these different brands simultaneously made the same "secret discovery" about tar-and-nicotine ratios he said only Philip Morris possessed. But before Mr. Waxman does, he should check with any knowledgeable physical chemist who will explain to him that the slightly differing nicotine-to-tar ratios between full delivery cigarettes and low delivery cigarettes are a matter of physics and not of any malicious intent.

NOTE TO EDITORS: For a copy of the FTC report or any other materials referenced in this press release, please contact Dolly Colby at 212/878-2144.

CONTACT: Dolly Colby

212-878-2144