Out of the ashes: the life, death, and rebirth of the "safer" cigarette in the United States

Abstract

From 1964 through the early 1980s, both federal and voluntary agencies endorsed the concept of "safer" cigarettes. Beginning in the mid-1980s, several factors, including revelations of tobacco industry malfeasance, the development of nicotine replacement therapy, and the reconceptualization of smoking as a chronic disease, led to "safer" cigarettes being discredited. In the past few years, some public health professionals have begun to reconsider the viability of developing such products. The issue before us is stark: will a commitment to limiting the toll exacted by smoking preclude the tolerance of a product that while not safe may possibly be safer?

Figure 1

In the 1950s and 1960s, tobacco companies responded to popular concerns about the health hazards of smoking by seeking to convince consumers that new filtered cigarettes were safer, without actually conceding that smoking itself was dangerous. This 1960 magazine advertisement for Duke cigarettes illustrates the use of an implicit “harm reduction” approach to appeal to people who wanted to be able to smoke more safely.

Figure 2

Surgeon General Luther Terry announces the release in January 1964 of the first Surgeon General’s Report on Smoking and Health, a landmark document that helped to galvanize the modern antitobacco movement. Behind Terry are members of the scientific committee that compiled the report. Reflecting a widespread belief among public health officials of the day, Terry considered filters that might make smoking safer to be “a promising avenue for further development.”

Figure 3

In 1989, RJ Reynolds withdrew its newly developed Premier “smokeless cigarette” amid attacks from public health groups and a tepid response from consumers. Without acknowledging that smoking was dangerous, Reynolds claimed the product would reduce smokers’ exposure to some of the chemical components of cigarettes