Lowest Tar And Nicotine Cigarettes Brands

'Choosing to smoke low tar cigarettes does not result in a lower risk of lung cancer. 'Low tar cigarettes offer smokers a false promise of reduced risk. Tar and nicotine levels by cigarette brand. 11 simple tricks to quit smoking. How long does nicotine stay in your body. The 72 hour quit smoking challenge. Herbal cigarettes to quit smoking. Quit smoking in the new year. Best and worst cigarettes. Breaking the psychological addiction to smoking.

1. Nicotine Per Cigarette By Brand
2. Lowest Tar And Nicotine Cigarettes Brands List

Lexington is a Luxembourgish brand of cigarettes, currently owned and manufactured by Landewyck Tobacco.^[1] In South Africa, it is sold by BAT South Africa, a subsidiary of British American Tobacco.^[2]

• 2Controversy
• 3Sponsorships

History[edit]

Lexington was launched in 1950 and became one of the most popular brands of the 1950s, with one billion cigarettes being sold every year since 1955.^[3] The cigarettes became a popular brand in the Netherlands and South Africa, but failed on the German market.^[4]

Various advertising jingles were created from the 1960s until the 1980s for South African radio,^[5][6] as well as advertising posters in Dutch and South African English and Afrikaans.^[7][8] A hand-drawn dog known as Lexi was also created in the 1960s to act as an advertiser for the cigarette brand.^[9]

Nicotine Per Cigarette By Brand

Some of the most popular slogans used to promote the brand were 'For after action satisfaction, smoke Lexington' and 'Lexington, that's the one'.

Controversy[edit]

The Lexington-affaire[edit]

In March 1962, the Dutch Consumentenbond released an article in their own newspaper, the Consumentengids, comparing the 14 most popular cigarette brands in the Netherlands at the time based on their tar and nicotine levels. The test was done on a special smoking machine that mimics a person who smokes.The test concluded that there was little difference in the amount of nicotine in the cigarettes. The brands Three Castles, Peter Stuyvesant, Chief Whip, and Alaska had the smallest amount of nicotine in their smoke. The highest amount of nicotine was measured in the Lexington cigarette smoke with 0.88 mg. The differences in tar were much more prominent, however. The Roxy cigarette had the lowest amount of tar with 30.5 mg. The brands Hunter and Lexington had twice the amount of tar in their smoke with 75.0 and 63.9 mg respectively.

At the time there was much concern about possible health hazards of smoking. Since the 1950s, research had been performed about the health risks of smoking and in March 1962, 5 days after the publication of the Consumentengids article, a report was released by the Royal College of Physicians titled Smoking and health, linking smoking to various diseases such as lung cancer and heart attacks.^[10] The Dutch press paid a lot of attention to that report, as well as that of the Consumentenbond. Due to all the exposure from the newspapers, the article reached a lot more people than the 35,000 subscribers to Consumentengids.

The reaction was massive. Many people switched over to the brands that passed the test such as Roxy, others started smoking cigars as a safer alternative, and some reduced their smoking habit or even quit smoking altogether. The Koninklijke Theodorus Niemeyer BV company used the publication as publicity to advertise their Roxy brand as 'low tar' and 'low nicotine' with the slogan 'Roxy – Nu beter dan ooit!'.

Most tobacco companies at the time (such as British American Tobacco) refused to acknowledge the Consumentengids report, saying it was not factually based, and tried to focus as little attention on their brands as possible. However Abraham Jan Blok, the importer of the Lexington brand to the Netherlands, was furious. Lexington was the market leader at the time, with nearly 25% of all cigarettes sold in the Netherlands being Lexington cigarettes. Blok challenged the Consumentenbod, claiming that their test results were inaccurate, and performing his own tests in London, New York City and Zurich with different results, one showing that the amount of tar was as low as 12.1 mg, compared to the 63.9 mg in the Consumentenbond report. With these results, Blok started a new advertising campaign to 'cleanse' Lexington from the dirty image it had acquired. He paid every major Dutch newspaper at the time (117 in total) at a cost of 250,000 guilders to publish a large advertisement claiming that the amount of tar in Lexington cigarettes was much lower than what was reported in the Consumentengids report. At the same time he launched a major publicity offensive with leaflets and increased advertising including a cinema advertisement featuring cool stuntmen and rough cowboys.

Bartholomeus Buitendijk, one of the two original founders of the Consumentenbond, reacted on the radio about Blok's accusations concerning the test. Abraham Blok said that it wasnot an exaggeration, due to the fact that the manufacturer of Lexington had lost millions after the publication of the article. On 25 May 1962, the Consumentenbond received a summons in which Blok sued them. The primary demand was that the Consumentenbond would have to release an extra edition of the Consumentengids within one week containing a correction to the test report.

The court hearing began on 6 June 1962. J.A. Stoop, Blok's lawyer, attacked the 'irresponsible' and 'hasty' publication of the results of the 'faulty' test by the Consumentenbond and compared it to the results from the other three tests done in London, New York and Zurich. From these results it was shown that a different length of cigarette, puff duration, puff frequency and puff volume were used and that the results for tar and nicotine were different for that reason. The lawyer for the defence, J.A. Nagtegaal, tried to justify the test in every way possible by calling various experts to his defence; Bertram who led the research, a statistician (who abruptly debunked his own research) and a doctor. After several days of testimony, the final judgement on 22 June 1962, concluded that there was no standard way of testing, and the Consumentenbond should have realised this before publishing the article. The judge (an avid subscriber to the Consumentengids who had not smoked for years and hoped that he would not lose his subscription) said that Lexington was right but did not agree with all the demands made by Blok. The Consumentenbond was forbidden to repeat the publication and had to pay Blok's court costs of 395 guilders, but wasnot required to publish a retraction as Blok had demanded.

In July 1962, the members of the Consumentenbond and Blok reached a compromise; Blok dropped all the demands for financial compensation, and the Consumentenbond published a correction in Consumentengids, admitting their wrongdoing.

The whole Lextington-affaire was publicised widely in the press. Before the judge reached his final judgement, there was a lot of criticism of the way the Consumentenbond handled the situation. Especially Elsevier and several trade magazines lashed out at the company, calling the test 'shameful and harmful' and the Consumentenbond 'meddlesome' and 'left-leaning'.

The aftermath of the affair had large and surprising consequences. The Consumentenbond was accused of being inaccurate and 'dilettantist', but had also gained valuable publicity and were praised as a small company who had bravely fought against the producer of a big and popular brand of cigarettes. The company gained 25,000 new members, reaching 250,000 in 1969. Even though Blok had won the court case, the constant association between the Consumentenbond test and his brand, as well as the ever-increasing fear of smoking and health hazards in the Dutch market, caused Lexington's market share to crumble within two years from nearly 25% to 7%, declining to a second-tier brand within a few years.

Lexington is still manufactured in the Netherlands, while Abraham Blok moved to Switzerland. The dog Lexi was terminated as no longer fitting into Lexington's market strategy.^{[9][11][12][13][14][15]}

Sponsorships[edit]

Formula 1[edit]

In the 1975 Formula One season and 1976 Formula One season, Lexington sponsored a private-entry Tyrrell Racing team to compete with Jody Scheckter at the 1975 and 1976 South African Grand Prix. The car used and driven was the Tyrrell 007.^{[16][17][18][19][20][21]}

Markets[edit]

Lexington is or was sold in the following countries: Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany, Greece, Zambia and South Africa.^[22][23][24]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^S.A., LANDEWYCK TOBACCO. 'Landewyck: cigarettes'. Hvl.lu. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
2. ^'British American Tobacco South Africa - Our brands'. Batsa.co.za. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
3. ^S.A., LANDEWYCK TOBACCO. 'Landewyck: History - Sales'. Hvl.lu. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
4. ^'ZIGARETTEN: Für die Katz'. 8 May 1978. Retrieved 9 January 2018 – via Spiegel Online.
5. ^SRPS AUDIO ARCHIVE JOHANNESBURG (24 April 2017). 'LEXINGTON CIGARETTES'. YouTube. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
6. ^Ulric Algar (18 January 2012). 'Better than a Lexington'. YouTube. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
7. ^'South African memories'. Pinterest. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
8. ^'1960'S LEXINGTON CIGARETTES ADVERT IN AFRIKAANS - bidorbuy.co.za'. bidorbuy.co.za. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
9. ^ ^abDe Waal, Joost. 'De Lexington-affaire'. Andere Tijden. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
10. ^'Smoking and health (1962)'. Rcplondon.ac.uk. 10 September 2015. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
11. ^'... kwam Lexington als slechtste sigaret uit de bus'. Trouw. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
12. ^'ANDERE TIJDEN - Teleblik'. Teleblik.nl. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
13. ^'Nieuwe Leidsche Courant - 19 april 1962 - pagina 19'. Historische Kranten, Erfgoed Leiden en Omstreken. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
14. ^'De Lexington-affaire en de doorbraak van de consumentenbond (1962)'. Isgeschiedenis.nl. 21 June 2017. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
15. ^'Geschiedenis van 1962 - Het jaar 1962'. Aandachtvoorgeschiedenis.nl. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
16. ^'Lexington Racing - ChicaneF1.com'. www.chicanef1.com.
17. ^'Lexington Racing'. 12 June 2017.
18. ^'F1 - Prywatne zespoły'. Pinterest.
19. ^'Tyrrell 007 / 1 F1 - ex- Lexington Racing , Ian Scheckter , Jody Scheckter Elf Team Tyrrell - South African Drivers Championship 1975 - South African F1 Grand Prix , Kyalami , 1975 & 1976 - Heidelberg Transport Museum , 1998 - SA00085'.
20. ^'Lexington Racing'. www.laberezina.com.
21. ^Papercraft (9 September 2016). 'F1 Paper Model - Tyrrell 007 Ford Lexington Racing Ian Scheckte AFS01 Paper Car Free Download'.
22. ^'BrandLexington - Cigarettes Pedia'. Cigarettespedia.com. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
23. ^'Lexington'. Zigsam.at. Retrieved 9 January 2018.
24. ^'Brands'. www.cigarety.by.

Alice,

I was wondering if you could tell me what the cigarette with the lowest tar and nicotine is on the market or if there is one with no nicotine?

Thanks,
Mr. Camel

Dear Mr. Camel,

The short answer to your question is that there are indeed cigarettes with varying levels of tar and nicotine on the market. However, it’s difficult to tell you which cigarettes have the lowest levels of these substances. And, as for your interest in knowing whether there are cigarettes sans nicotine — there aren't any commercially available nicotine-free cigarettes. Since you brought it up though, you may be interested to know about a few factors that influence tar and nicotine levels in cigarettes and how they impact the health of smokers.

Over the years, there have been a number of adjustments made to cigarettes to manipulate the amount of tar and nicotine in cigarettes, including:

• Filters of various sizes and densities
• Holes to ventilate the cigarettes, thereby diluting the amount of smoke measured
• Putting additives in the paper wrappers or the tobacco itself
• Different types of tobacco

List adapted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Though these may change the levels of these substances in cigarettes, there's no scientific evidence to suggest that any of these alterations have resulted in a lower incidence of disease due to smoking. Both Federal regulations and research has shed some additional light on other ways smokers are impacted by the manipulation of these substances.

Lowest Tar And Nicotine Cigarettes Brands List

Time to talk about tar: The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 (in addition to a number of new regulations) prohibits tobacco manufacturers from labeling their cigarettes as “low,’ “light,” or “mild” with regard to tar content. It was found that such labeling led consumers to believe that low-tar cigarettes were less harmful, when, in fact, research does not support this assumption. Though it’s not as clear as it once was to identify low-tar cigarettes, researchers have since identified a number of ways in which packaging has influenced consumers' inaccurate perception of a 'lower-risk' cigarette. Some of these factors include lighter package colors, softer packages, ventilation in the filters, and descriptors such as smooth and silver (which were not included as key terms in the 2009 act). And, even though increased cigarette filter ventilation is the only one of these that can actually lead to lower-tar yield, low-tar cigarettes are not considered less harmful and are not recommended as an alternative to regular or 'full-flavor' cigarettes.

On to nicotine: Although a nicotine-free cigarette doesn't exist, there are a few brands of cigarettes with reduced levels of nicotine on the market. Research on the use of reduced-nicotine content (RNC) cigarettes has aimed to investigate whether they could reduce health risks to smokers and potentially act as a cessation tool.

However, findings from a number of studies are not in exact agreement in these areas. It was initially thought that those using RNC cigarettes would engage in compensatory behavior (i.e., smokers would simply inhale the smoke more deeply and more frequently than they would when smoking a regular cigarette to make up for lower nicotine levels). In turn, it was thought that this type of smoking would also increase exposure to toxicants in smoke (and thus, increase the health risk). A few short-term studies found that a number of participants who smoked RNC cigarettes ended up smoking the same number of cigarettes as their regular cigarette counterparts, and in turn, reduced their overall nicotine consumption. Interestingly, exposure to other toxic substances in cigarettes was not altered. Moreover, of those who did not quit altogether during the study (a few reported spontaneous cessation), some reported that their dependence on nicotine had decreased.

A more recent, longer-term study had slightly dissimilar findings. Initially, all of the participants reported that they were uninterested in quitting. Those in the control group smoked regular cigarettes for 12 months. The experimental group smoked increasingly reduced-nicotine content cigarettes for the same 12 months. After the initial 12 months, both groups were instructed to smoke any cigarettes they wanted for one year. After a two year follow-up, the researchers found that participants in the experimental group were more likely to express interest in quitting than control group. Despite this observation, the experimental group did not experience a decrease in nicotine dependence and exposure levels to toxicants did not change. In fact, the researchers suspected that the participants in the experimental group actually supplemented their RNC cigarette use with regular cigarettes during the study period.

Mr. Camel, it's unclear what your interest is in cigarettes with lower levels of tar and nicotine. But, if you're wanting to limit your exposure to these substances, the best way is to avoid cigarettes all together. If you or someone you know is looking to kick their cigarette butts to the curb, there's a wealth of resources available to help. You might also see whether your school, community, health insurance plan, or workplace offers support such as tobacco cessation counseling and nicotine replacement therapy — both are shown to be effective cessation strategies and are even more effective when used together. Smokefree.gov is another great national resource to help you find even more information and help locally.

Here's hoping you have no more ifs, ands, or (cigarette) butts about this topic,