Efforts to Boost Nicotine’s Potency Revealed

A flurry of documents introduced Wednesday in Minnesota’s landmark anti-tobacco case portray an industry deeply absorbed in improving the efficiency of nicotine delivery into the bloodstream even as it ratcheted down tar and nicotine levels to reassure worried smokers.

An expert witness testifying for the state said the documents show the companies were worried about remaining “above the threshold” of an effective nicotine dose, and that during the 1970s and 1980s they turned to chemical treatment and other methods to boost the efficiency of nicotine delivery.

According to the witness, Stanford University chemical engineering professor Channing R. Robertson, the goal was to keep cigarettes “an effective and efficient and consumer-accepted drug delivery system,” despite the move to “lighter” brands.

Several of the documents reviewed by Robertson on Wednesday concerned efforts by rival firms to break down Philip Morris’ powerhouse Marlboro brand to discover the source of its success. According to an R.J. Reynolds memo, Marlboro’s growth corresponded to the time in the mid-1960s when Philip Morris began using tobacco treated with ammonia. Ammonia is known to increase the pH, or alkalinity, of cigarette smoke, thus increasing the amount of so-called free nicotine that can be delivered to the lungs and brain.

Documents produced in the case by Philip Morris’ major U.S. competitors--Reynolds, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard--show they began relying on ammonia treatment in the 1970s and ‘80s, Robertson said. “This was the functional equivalent of increasing” nicotine levels, he said.

Minnesota is trying to build a case that cigarette makers knew their products were addictive and manipulated the nicotine dose to keep customers from quitting--allegations the industry has denied.

Along with Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Minnesota, the state is seeking to recover more than $1.7 billion in health-care costs it claims have resulted from smoking-related illnesses. Earlier in the trial, the plaintiffs introduced a slew of documents in which industry figures called nicotine addictive.

Among the documents released Wednesday:

* A 1977 memo from Lorillard stating, “The trend toward low-tar cigarettes necessitates that ways be found to maintain nicotine satisfaction.”

* A 1973 R.J. Reynolds memo stating that “any desired additional nicotine ‘kick’ could be easily obtained through pH regulation.”

Cigarette makers will not begin presenting their case for at least several weeks. They contend that smokers in Minnesota have not incurred higher health-care costs than nonsmokers.