Judge and senator lead the charge to snuff out 'light' label on cigarettes
Belkis Martinez switched to light cigarettes to put herself on the path toward quitting.
"I thought light cigarettes would slow me down. But I just smoked more of them," the 37-year-old coordinator for a health care agency said while smoking outside her downtown Newark office building recently.
She eventually went back to regular Newport 100s.
Martinez's experience shows how smokers who switch to "light" brands often smoke more, or inhale more deeply, to get the nicotine their brains crave, according to anti-smoking activists and internal tobacco company documents.
The marketing of these "light" cigarettes is under fire by U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler of Washington, D.C., and New Jersey's senior senator, Frank Lautenberg, a Democrat.
In a decision earlier this summer, Kessler ruled that tobacco companies have systematically lied to the American people. She ordered cigarette makers to stop using terms such as "light," "ultra light," "mild" and "low-tar." Sales of "lights" constitute 50 percent of the cigarette market, according to analysts.
Altria Group, the parent company of Philip Morris, has appealed the judge's ruling. So Lautenberg introduced the "truth in cigarette labeling act" on Thursday that would prohibit what he calls deceptive marketing of "light" cigarettes.
"These (terms) deceive people into believing they can continue to puff away and not hurt themselves," said Lautenberg, who smoked for 30 years before quitting. "But it's an outright deception tactic from the industry. People get more tar from lights than from regular cigarettes."
The Altria statement said cigarette companies already have made "profound and permanent changes" in the way cigarettes are marketed and follow requirements imposed by state attorneys general.
Many smokers choose "light" cigarettes thinking they are less harmful than "regular" cigarettes. But, according to the National Cancer Institute, the smoother and lighter sensation smokers feel in their throat and chest does not mean these cigarettes are any less lethal. The only way to reduce a smoker's risk, says the institute, is to stop smoking.
Lautenberg's legislation would prohibit tobacco companies from using the Federal Trade Commission "smoking machine" test that measures levels of tar and nicotine. Critics say the machine does not reflect real-world use of "light" cigarettes, and individuals usually smoke these cigarettes more often, or inhale more deeply, to sustain needed nicotine levels.
In some instances, holes near the cigarette filter reduce tar and nicotine measured by the machine, but most smokers cover the holes with their fingers when they hold their cigarettes, anti-smoking activists claim.
"It is well known that these testing machines don't reflect what people actually get," said Bill Corr, executive director of the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, based in Washington.
"These cigarettes just fool the machines," he said.
Lautenberg said tobacco companies knew smokers would generally get just as much tar and nicotine from the "light" cigarettes. He pointed to a 1975 Philip Morris USA memo that found Marlboro Lights smokers took larger and more frequent puffs than smokers of regular cigarettes.
Smokers who switched from Marlboro Reds to Marlboro Lights actually got more tar and equal amounts of nicotine than those who stayed with Marlboro Reds, according to the internal memo.
Tobacco companies have said they do not claim "light" or "low tar" cigarettes are less harmful than regular ones. "Philip Morris does not imply and smokers should not assume that low (tar and nicotine) yielding brands are safe or safer than full-flavored brands," said Philip Morris USA spokesman Bill Phelps. He said the terms refer to "attributes of strength and flavor ... to distinguish between brands."
Yet surveys show smokers often believe "light" means less hazardous -- much the way light ice cream or light mayonnaise are healthier versions of fattening products.
A survey published in the 1998 Journal of Preventive Medicine found that 39 percent of "light" smokers and 58 percent of "ultra light" smokers said they smoke these cigarettes to reduce the risks of smoking without having to quit. More than a dozen other surveys cited by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids found similar results.
"Smokers believe these brands to be less harmful and manufacturers know this," said Jonathan Foulds, director of the Tobacco Dependence Program at the School of Public Health at UMDNJ.
He said the terms go along with marketing campaigns that stress health. "You have the pictures of snow-capped mountains. The whole image," he said.
Leonard Mathis, a 30-year-old file clerk smoking outside his Newark office building recently, said he switched to Newport lights thinking the cigarettes would help him quit. "I'm not saying I thought they were less harmful," he said. But they did not help him quit.
"I wish I could stop. I'm getting everyone else rich except for myself," he said.
Many smokers have no illusions about "light" cigarettes.
"I like them better. It's my preference," said Christina Jensen, a 26-year-old smoking Parliament Lights outside her office building. "But they are just as bad. Any smoker should know that."
