Speaking at the International Conference on Prevention of Tobacco Induced Diseases at Little Rock, Arkansas (USA), Hemant Goswami, a leading public health and social activist from India, asked the global scientific community to be more vigilant and alert before embracing the concepts like “Fire Safe Cigarettes.” Speaking on the subject of “Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarettes – Facts, Fiction and Manipulations” Goswami made his case by analyzing the tobacco industry videos and document to point towards a clear strategic push by a big tobacco multinational which ultimately managed to influence and convince one of the US states to adopt the concept of fire-safe cigarettes. Quoting the adoption of fire-safe standards by New York as an example, the notion has now caught up in many other States and countries. “We must do independent primary research before accepting and adopting concepts like fire-safe cigarettes, (also called Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarettes [RIP]) which are claimed to be less likely to ignite indoor structural fires if left unattended. Such concepts have been only tested from the fire-safety point of view and no independent study has still been undertaken by the scientific or public health community to assess the effect of the engineered modifications in RIP cigarettes. The scientific community must do independent primary study to get a clear idea about things like, the effect on Nicotine delivery due to change in mass burn rate, paper porosity, chemical coatings, banding pattern manipulation on RIP; the increased toxicity levels in RIP; puff-to-puff count and changes in actual human puffing and inhalation of RIP so as to assess it’s effect on current smokers and know about any increase in addictiveness and other changes,” Hemant emphasised. Elaborating further on the issue, Hemant said, “The scientific community and the legislatives were highly vulnerable to the manipulation and rigging by the tobacco industry. This was evident from the tobacco industry bates document which shows that Phillip Morris had undertaken secret studies code named as “Project Tomorrow,” “Project Hamlet,” “Project Delta,” etc. with an intention to develop a patented cigarette paper technology so that it could give it’s business the cutting edge and reduce the competition in the market. The company actually succeeded in its objective by developing such a patented cigarette paper and also managed to manipulate and strategically push it through the scientific and public health community in the name of “Reduced Ignition Propensity” cigarettes. The patented paper and the testing method developed by Phillip Morris (On which ASTM standard E2187-02b have been modelled) have been adopted in its totality on the pretext of fire-safe cigarettes. Such tactic has already increased the market share of the big tobacco in the New York by eliminating the smaller and unorganised tobacco industry players.” There has been a dangerous cross-over as now many health departments across the globe are adopting RIP as fire-safe cigarette standards, unconcerned and unmindful of the fact that the initial concept of RIP was tested by the NY fire-safety department and the modification were also approved by the fire-safety department and not the health department. This crossing over of the concept from the fire safety departments to public health department is the biggest slip and manipulation ever in tobacco control. The analysis of the structural fire related fatalities in NY also show that there has been no reduction in the fire-related deaths as was initially claimed. Moreover, contrary to popular belief, RIP cigarettes actually offer no protection from the California like forest fires.

1. Assessing
Reduced Ignition Propensity (RIP)
Cigarettes – Facts, Fiction and
Manipulations
by Hemant Goswami
hemant@burningbrain.org
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

2. Reduced Ignition Propensity (Fire Safe)
Cigarettes
Background
Since about last twenty years the concept of developing fire safe cigarettes has
been highlighted from time to time. Such cigarettes have recently been introduced
in the market and have been labelled as Reduced Ignition Propensity Cigarettes
(RIP). Many governments across the world are going ahead with legislations to
make RIP cigarettes mandatory. It has been claimed that such cigarettes will
reduce cigarette caused fire by as much as 68 percent.
Context
In 2003 New York made RIP cigarettes mandatory through legislation. The
following year five other states signed similar legislation. In 2005, Health Canada
also announced “Cigarette Ignition Propensity Regulations”.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

3. What is RIP??
It is claimed that Reduced Ignition Propensity
(RIP) (also referred as fire-safe) cigarette has a reduced
propensity to burn when left unattended.
It is further claimed that the most common fire-
safe technology used by cigarette manufacturers is to
wrap cigarettes with two or three thin bands of less-porous
paper that act as “speed bumps” to slow down a burning
cigarette. If a fire-safe cigarette is left unattended, the
burning tobacco will reach one of these speed bumps and
self-extinguish.
It is emphasised that RIP/Fire-safe cigarettes
meet an established cigarette fire safety performance
standard (based on ASTM E2187, Standard Test Method
for Measuring the Ignition Strength of Cigarettes).
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

4. What is Claimed?
1. RIP will save 900 lives per annum in the USA lost to structural fires
2. RIP will reduce the fires by two third of the present rate
3. It’s will make smoking and cigarettes more safe in terms of the ignitibility
4. The name “Fire- Safe” is being associated with RIP
5. It has been claimed that these cigarettes have gone through stringent
testing
6. Further claimed that RIP is already saving lives in New York, where it was
introduced in 2003
But reliable, verifiable and authentic reference to all these claims is
missing… not a single independent and primary reference is available.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

5. Testing Method - ASTM standard E2187-02b
6. Observe the burning cigarette. The smoke plume near the cigarette must remain
Procedure : Testing of cigarettes was conducted in accordance with the ASTM standard
undisturbed. If it does not, the chamber and exhaust system shall be re-
E2187-02b quot;Standard Test Method for Measuring the Ignition Strength of
checked. If the chamber and exhaust system are behaving properly, but the
Cigarettesquot;. The test steps are provided below:
particular test cigarettes continue to produce disturbed smoke plumes, this
1. Turn on the exhaust system designated for removal of test combustion products 30 min prior to observation shall be noted on the test sheet.
beginning testing.
2. Ensure that the filter paper holder is in the test chamber at the geometric center of its bottom.
Cover the chimney on the test chamber. 7. Record the following results:
3. Conduct the test using 10 layers of filter paper.
7.1 Any of the tobacco column burns to or past the front plane of the tipping paper
3.1 Immediately before testing, place the proper number of filter papers on the filter paper holder
and place the metal test rim on top. Discard filter papers that will not lay flat. (filter tip cigarettes) or past the tips of the metal pins for non-filter tip cigarettes;
3.2 Place the cigarette holder on the floor of the chamber, just forward of the center of the filter or
paper holder.
7.2 The burning ceases before reaching the front plane of the tipping paper (filter tip
4 Without delay, remove a cigarette from the conditioned space. Insert the unmarked end of the
cigarette into the cigarette ignition system and hold it in a horizontal position. Turn on the cigarettes) or the tips of the metal pins for non-filter tip cigarettes.
air draw. Hold the ignition flame just in front of the marked end of the cigarette for as long
7.3 The observations stated in 10.5.3 and 10.6.
as is necessary to achieve uniform ignition without passing the 5 mm mark. During the
ignition process, the cigarette shall be rotated as needed to obtain an approximately
symmetrical burn. Note: If the operator is performing concurrent determinations in multiple 8. Ensure that neither the cigarette nor the filter papers are burning.
test chambers, the operator shall not light a third cigarette until each of the first two
cigarettes has been placed on its respective set of filter papers. No more than two
cigarettes shall be in the pre-burn stage at any time. 9. Open the test chamber door to allow air to circulate throughout its volume. After the
5 Holding the cigarette vertically, coal end up and under a 600 ml beaker, transport the cigarette
chamber has cleared, prepare for the next determination.
to the test chamber.
5.1 Place the lit cigarette, in a horizontal position with the cigarette paper seam up, in the
cigarette holder.
10. Repeat the determination with each cigarette 40 times per test. Calculate the
5.2 Simultaneously close the door and remove the chimney cover.
fraction of determinations in which the cigarettes burned their full length. This
5.3 If the cigarette self-extinguishes while in the cigarette holder, terminate the determination
and record the results as a self-extinguishment, noting that this occurred in the holder. fraction is the test result.
This attempt shall count as a valid determination. The test operator shall be permitted to
re-use this set of sheets of filter paper. However, if the room is not at the standard
conditioning temperature and humidity, the paper shall be reconditioned in the humidity
chamber.
5.4 When the cigarette has burned to the 15 mm mark, simultaneously cover the chimney and
open the chamber door, gently remove the cigarette from the holder, and move the holder
to the front corner of the test chamber.
5.5 Gently lay the cigarette with the ash still attached onto the top of the filter papers so that the
nonignited end is placed between the appropriately sized cigarette anti-roll parallel metal
pins. The cigarette paper seam shall be turned up. Do not drop the cigarette onto the filter
papers and do not press the coal into the papers. If the ash falls off during any part of the
transport or positioning process, terminate the determination and begin again; do not
count the attempt.
5.6 Without delay, simultaneously remove the chimney cover and gently close the door.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

6. How the standards were developed?
The Technical Study Group which ran from 1984 to 1987
and then a Technical Advisory Group which ran from
1990 to 1993, (the 20 years long study; referred by some)
was dominated (and studies done in association) by the
tobacco industry.
All the golden standards were pushed by the industry;
especially Phillips Morris
It complimented the research done by their R & D
Departments
The final testing methodology was devised by Phillips
Morris which was also used by “National Institute of
Promotional Video by Phillip Morris
Standards and technology” and later adopted by
“American Society for Testing of Materials” which was
(About Paper Select)
later known as ASTM standard E2187-02b quot;Standard Test
Method.”
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

7. How safe is fire-safe
October 2007: California Forest Fire
Rip has been tested only in controlled conditions. In perfect lab
RIP is not useful to
conditions which does not take into account the real life environment;
prevent real world
so it is claimed that RIP might be effective in preventing only
STRUCTURAL FIRES. outdoor fires
Even PM’s document point out that out of the 500 fabrics tested, the
results were negative in 150. So these 150 were excluded.
Wind conditions, Moisture, Slant, Direction, Height of fall, ignitability
between bands, etc. nothing was taken into consideration. Many
important parameters were sacrificed for getting consistent test results.
Statistics from NY do not
support the safety claims
and logic of RIP. There
were less civilian fatalities
in 2004 than 2005 and
2006.
Press Interview by Phillip Morris Spokesperson
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

8. Tracking the recent events
In 2003 New York Fire Safety Department adopted the RIP parameters and passed a
law on “Reduced Ignition Propensity” cigarettes
(There was no consultation with the health department and/or and research/study done by the scientific
community to assess any changes due to mechanical modification of the cigarettes)
The testing parameter/methodology was actually devised by Phillip Morris
Subsequently 20 US states also moved ahead with legislation. The New York law is taken as
the reference.
Canada also enacted a law on Fire safe Cigarettes. The New York law is taken as the
reference. The position paper liberally quotes from Phillip Morris and R J Reynolds research.
Australia and UK are in the final phases. The New York example is taken as the reference.
BAT oppose the move but PM stays neutral and raises only token protest.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

9. The dangerous CROSS OVER
The New York “Reduced Ignition Propensity” cigarettes were developed by the New York Fire Safety Department in
association with ASTM and tested only the ignitability of cigarettes. No health effects were ever considered. There
was no consultation with the health department and/or and research/study done by the scientific community to
assess any changes due to mechanical modification of the cigarettes.
It was not at all a public health issue but rather a question of fire safety.
There has been no scientific assessment/research on the health effects of RIP on current smokers. There has been no
scientific and/or behavioural study to assess the possible effect of more frequent and deeper puffing and inhalations.
However when the RIP concept crossed geographical borders
It was adopted by the HEALTH DEPARTMENTS & TOBACCO CONTROL BODIES
without any independent assessment and without realising that there has been no study
by the health department in the New York case and a detailed analysis of effect of changed
design on “Nicotine Delivery” has never been studied at all. It has been done by CANADA,
where Health Canada came out with a detailed position (research) paper, based on
secondary data and even made a law. Australia and UK are on the path to adopt RIP on the
same secondary (industry) data.
It’s a dangerous cross over…………..missed by the scientific community
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

10. The tobacco industry interest
Document dated: March 25, 1988
Phillip Morris Strategic plan 1989
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

11. The tobacco industry interest
Phillip Morris Strategic plan 1989
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

12. Tracking the industry documents Phillip
Morris Strategic plan 1989 (Bate 2021556680)
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

13. The tobacco industry interest
Project Tomorrow is a major R&D program designed to address ignition
propensity. Congress has mandated that the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) develop a test that will be used to make decisions regarding
the feasibility of the design of cigarettes with low ignition propensity. PM U.S.A.
must design a test to verify that the decisions made are not based on flawed
information. Project Tomorrow includes
1) the development of such a test,
2) computer modelling of a smoldering cigarette in contact with a flammable
substrate,
3) the development of banded cigarette papers and
4) low mass burn rate cigarettes as potential means of reduction of ignition
propensity while maintaining consumer subjective acceptability.
[Page 68-69 of Phillip Morris U.S.A. Confidential Strategic Plan 1993-1997 --- Bates: 2021523004-5]
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

14. The tobacco industry intentions
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

15. The tobacco industry intentions
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

16. The tobacco industry studies
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

17. Strategy Changed
The industry tone changed after 1994 after many papers were patented. It was a
new strategy…..
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

18. Who owns the patent to the paper used in
RIP cigarettes?
This answer also hold the key to understand the careful ploy by the powerful Industry sharks.
Philip Morris (PM) and Schweitzer-Mauduit International holds the joint EXCLUSIVE
patent of the RIP paper.
So is this also a patent war? It's also a question of grabbing the largest market share and
controlling the smaller players… and much more. Who gets direct commercial benefit with
the new regulation?
The position paper by BAT (Australia) clearly opposes RIP. In the position paper, BAT also
make logical arguments about the effectiveness of RIP. Notably PM is absent from most of
these meetings. What options does BAT have, if the patent to the RIP paper is with PM and
the government is bent upon patronizing the same PM paper? The reasoning of BAT in the
light that the new standards fixed by NY (Which are likely to be copied) endorsing PM’s
patented paper technology (The banded paper) is clearly to protect its own commercial
interest.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

19. What we missed?????
Because of the involvement of Fire safety issues and by finding application of ASTM standards to set combustibility of
cigarettes; a serious study and research on the possible behavioral changes and/or increased harmful
consequences of increased frequency and deeper puffing of RIP was bypassed. Such committee on combustion has
been called an “Expert Group” and thereby managed to divert the attention of the public health department and
community from other possible consequences.
Subsequently all other States and Countries are following the New York example; which in itself had ignored all other
aspects; except for the combustibility of the cigarettes. New York standards are being lifted from state-to-state and
country-to-country without independent application of mind.
The Canadian Cigarette Ignition Propensity regulations have been brought by the Canadian Health Department by referring
to the NY study. Health Canada adopted RIP despite the fact that NY study was done by fire-safety department and not the
Health Department. Surprisingly the Canadian regulation read that “……..The Department of Health therefore believes it
is in the interest of public health to take action to reduce the ignition propensity of cigarettes……….” This is a major
slip.
The 2005 Health Canada Regulation (Cigarette Ignition Propensity Regulations) even specifically (in a way) promotes Phillip
Morris and states “QUOTE” In July 2000, a major American cigarette manufacturer released a reduced-ignition propensity
version of one of its cigarette brands in the United States. In April 2001, it released a reduced ignition propensity version of
the same brand in New Zealand. This product is made with a patented paper which has concentric bands of ultra-thin paper
applied on top of traditional cigarette paper. The manufacturer claims that quot;These bands or rings act as 'speed bumps' to
slow down the rate at which the cigarette burns as the lit end crosses over themquot;. When tested by the U.S. National Institute
of Standards and Technology, these cigarettes were found to have a significantly reduced-ignition potential. “UNQUOTE”
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

20. The unanswered questions?
How does the Mass Burn Rate (MBR) affect the Nicotine delivery of RIP cigarettes?
How does the porosity of the paper affect the puffing and other chemical constituents of RIP cigarettes?
Does RIP results in increased and deeper puffing?
Does such increased and deeper puffing/inhalation have any added adverse effect on the present smokers?
How does the banding in paper affect the Nicotine delivery?
Does RIP increase the overall “Nicotine Yield?”
Does the material used in banding of RIP affect the chemical delivery?
Does RIP increases the toxicity of cigarettes?
What are the commercial gains for the industry which patents the paper for this kind of cigarettes?
Does such patenting remove the smaller players from the market and increase the brand share of the
existing big players?
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

21. Understanding the deeper science
It is evident that MBR affects the Nicotine Delivery and helps the tobacco industry to
engineer its products.
The change in design actually results in a better and more addictive product. Camouflaging it
in the form of RIP gives it a legal sanction and reduces opposition.
It has been researched that “increasing trend was observed in all major market categories
(mentholated vs non-mentholated, and full flavour vs light, medium (mild) or ultralight).
Nicotine yield in smoke was positively associated with nicotine concentration in the tobacco
and number of puffs per cigarette, both of which showed increasing trends between 1998
and 2005, i.e. during the study period. ”
Design modifications used to increase the addictiveness of cigarette can include techniques
like varying the quot;filter and paper ventilation,“ “paper porosity,” “Paper Coating” and slowing
the quot;burn rate,quot; which allows more puffs per cigarette.
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

22. What is the real issue
Longevity of the industry
A brand and patent war
Having a greater control over the market
Eliminating smaller players and increasing the market share
Anticipating future trends and taking proactive action
Using the knee-jerk reaction of tobacco-control and public-health
community to gain strategic advantage
Bypassing Health Department and science
Use of strategic games….which the public health and tobacco
control community does not understand even as on date
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

23. A fraud on Public Health
This strategic bypassing of proper testing and still managing to slip along
with a tacit consent of the public health community is the biggest fraud on
science during the last two decades. This also shows that how vulnerable
the scientific community can be to a well planned strategic approach of the
tobacco industry.
It’s FOOD for THOUGHT
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA

24. Let’s understand
There is more fire in this
smoke
Hemant Goswami
hemant@burningbrain.org
www.burningbrain.org
Hemant Goswami – ISPTID 2007 – Little Rock, USA