• U.S.

Smoking: Report on Filters

2 minute read
TIME

Do cigarette filters cut down on the tar and nicotine that have helped to earn tobacco its unpleasant reputation as a cause of lung cancer, heart disease and assorted other ills? Certainly both tobacco companies and smokers seem to think so. In 1952, only 2% of cigarettes manufactured in the U.S. were filtered; last year, when more cigarettes were sold than ever before, 64.7% had tips purportedly capable of straining out dangerous substances.

As recently as 1962, even so eminent a cancer researcher as Dr. George E.

Moore, of Buffalo’s Roswell Park Me morial Institute, agreed that filters could reduce the chances of disease. By last week, though, Dr. Moore had second thoughts. His latest tests showed that some filtered cigarettes let through more tar and nicotine than do cigarettes of the same brand without filter tips.

His findings were stark confirmation of studies made nine years ago (TIME, July 29, 1957), which showed that some cigarette manufacturers, anxious to get a satisfactory flavor past their filters and to their customers, had switched to stronger tobacco.

Dr. Moore’s findings show a wide variation among filtered brands. In the three cases where filters and nonfilters of the same brand were matched, the nonfilters did better — except for Lucky Strike filters, which passed more tar but slightly less nicotine than the regular brand of Luckies.

Milligrams of

BRAND TAR NICOTINE

Passed Through

Pall Mall filters 43.3. . . .2.13

Pall Mall regulars 32.7 1.75

Chesterfield filters 27.6 1.72

Chesterfield regulars 27.0. . .1.18

Lucky Strike filters 27.3 1.34

Lucky Strike regulars 27.2. .1.42

Salem filters 23.6 1 43

Lark filters 23.1 L26

Winston filters 22.9 1.32

Marlboro filters 22.4 1.24

Kent filters 18.8. . . . 1.10

True filters 16.9 79

Even though some filters are working more effectively than others, said Dr. Moore, none is really successful in protecting the smoker against lung cancer, emphysema, and cardiovascular disabilities. “Many filters are just not doing the job,” he said.

More Must-Reads from TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com