The tobacco industry has deliberately deceived the public with low tar and light cigarettes, according to a new report in the journal Tobacco Control.

The authors of the report allege that industry documents show that companies recognised that low tar products were as dangerous as regular cigarettes, yet marketed them as healthy alternatives.

Forum Response: Cancer Research UK

Jean King, director of education funding at Cancer Research UK, told ePolitix.com: "The tobacco industry's use of light and mild branding on cigarettes is deliberately misleading, and implies a health benefit that simply isn¹t there.

"Many smokers, particularly women, wrongly believe that smoking a light cigarette is less harmful than smoking one with a higher tar and nicotine content. Some smokers opt for these brands as a stepping stone towards quitting smoking.

"But in fact smokers of light brands often take longer and deeper puffs in order to compensate for the lower nicotine delivery and ensure they get their required dose of nicotine. This phenomenon has been linked to an increase in a previously rare form of lung cancer, adenocarcinoma, which occurs deep in the lungs.

"Cancer Research UK fully supports the proposed EU directive on tobacco product regulation, which proposes to ban misleading descriptions such as light or mild. This focus on the deliberately deceptive tactics of the tobacco industry is particularly timely coming the day before No Smoking Day."

Forum Response: Gallaher

A spokesperson for Gallaher told ePolitix.com: "Gallaher has successfully pursued a policy of lowering tar yields and continues this today. This policy of gradual reduction, adopted by Gallaher and subsequently endorsed by the UK government, goes back decades and precedes the introduction of voluntary agreements with the UK government and subsequent legislation across Europe that required Gallaher to do so.

"So far as the company is aware, no better course than tar reduction has been advocated by public health bodies to address the health concerns surrounding those who choose to smoke.

"Gallaher is committed to including information on tar and nicotine yields, as measured by approved international standards, for all of its cigarettes sold throughout the world. These numbers do not represent the actual delivery to individual smokers, given the different ways in which people smoke, but the company believes that tar and nicotine numbers are a meaningful guide to relative yields and as such, assist smokers in their choice of brand.

"The tar and nicotine yield numbers that appear on cigarettes are produced from international standardised testing methods. This methodology involves the collection and measurement (by weight in milligrams) of certain particulate matter produced by a smoking machine which 'smokes' cigarettes, taking puffs of a specified volume and for durations of defined intervals. As such, the numbers do not communicate the precise amount of tar or nicotine inhaled by an individual smoker.

"The tar and nicotine deliveries that any individual smoker will receive will depend, amongst other things, on the number of puffs taken from a cigarette, the size of each puff and the rate at which each puff is drawn from the cigarette. There can be no specifications for determining individual tar and nicotine, deliveries to the smoker, as the factors influencing them are largely with the control of each individual cigarette smokers.

"By their very nature, cigarettes with reduced tar levels are designed to produce lower smoke yields to smokers. With reductions in tar, there is an overall reduction in mainstream smoke constituents.

"Given the great variability in the way individuals smoke, Gallaher recognises that when a person switches to a lower tar product he or she may compensate, at least initially. That position has to be balanced against the overall desire of seeking to reduce the overall smoke yields of cigarettes. Indeed, this reinforces the importance of gradual reduction."

Forum Response: British American Tobacco

Dr Chris Proctor, head of science and regulation at British American Tobacco, told ePolitix.com: "The bottom line is that British American Tobacco has not misrepresented anything. The big issue is whether today's low tar cigarettes are better for smokers than the high tar cigarettes of thirty years ago.

"A sizeable proportion of the scientific community believe this to be the case. However, this is not to say low tar cigarettes are safe. If smokers are concerned about the health risks, the best course of action is to stop smoking."