RESEARCH PAPER

The Australian tar derby: the origins and fate of a low tar harm reduction programme

W King¹, S M Carter², R Borland¹, S Chapman^2,*, N Gray³

¹ VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control, The Cancer Council Victoria, Victoria, Australia
² School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
³ European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Bill King
VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control, The Cancer Council Victoria, 1 Rathdowne Street, Carlton, Vic 3053, Australia; Bill.king{at}cancervic.org.au

Objective: To document the development of the low tar harm reduction programme in Australia, including tobacco industry responses.

Data sources: Tobacco industry documents, retail tobacco journals, newspapers, medical journals, and Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria (ACCV) newsletters and archival records.

Study selection: Documents on the strategies and knowledge bases of the ACCV, other Australian health authorities, and the tobacco industry.

Results: The ACCV built a durable system for measuring and publicising the tar and nicotine yields of Australian cigarettes and influencing their development. The tobacco industry initially sought to block the development of this system but later appeared to cooperate with it, as is evidenced by the current market dominance of low tar brands. However, behind the scenes, the industry used its substantial knowledge advantage regarding compensatory smoking and its ability to re-engineer cigarettes to gain effective control of the system and subvert the ACCV’s objectives.

Conclusions: Replacement of the low tar programme with new means of minimising the harms from cigarette smoking should be a policy priority for the Australian government. This will require regulation, rather than further voluntary agreements, and stringent monitoring of successor programmes will be necessary.

Keywords: compensation; filter ventilation; harm reduction; nicotine; tar

Abbreviations: ACA, Australian Consumers Association; ACCV, Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria (The Cancer Council Victoria since 2002); AGAL, Australian Government Analytical Laboratory; BAT, British American Tobacco; BATA, British American Tobacco, Australia; BTCA, the British Tobacco Company Australia; CPM, corrected particulate matter; FTC, US Federal Trade Commission; ISO, International Standards Organization; NHMRC, National Health and Medical Research Council, PML, Philip Morris Limited (Australia); TPM, total particulate matter; Wills, WD & HO Wills Ltd

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Anderson, S. J, Ling, P. M, Glantz, S. A (2007). Implications of the federal court order banning the terms "light" and "mild": what difference could it make?. Tobacco Control 16: 275-279 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Ling, P M, Glantz, S A (2005). Tobacco industry consumer research on socially acceptable cigarettes. Tobacco Control 14: e3-e3 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gray, N, Henningfield, J E, Benowitz, N L, Connolly, G N, Dresler, C, Fagerstrom, K, Jarvis, M J, Boyle, P (2005). Toward a comprehensive long term nicotine policy. Tobacco Control 14: 161-165 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Chapman, S, Byrne, F, Carter, S M (2003). "Australia is one of the darkest markets in the world": the global importance of Australian tobacco control. Tobacco Control 12: iii1-3 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Carter, S M (2003). The Australian cigarette brand as product, person, and symbol. Tobacco Control 12: iii79-86 [Abstract] [Full Text]