Netherlands: Judge demands assessment of micro-perforations in cigarette filters
November 9, 2022
Par: National Committee Against Smoking
Dernière mise à jour: November 9, 2022
Temps de lecture: 4 minutes
Reviewing RIVM's work on cigarette filters in the Netherlands, a judge has ordered an expert assessment of the emissions found and is threatening to withdraw the products concerned from the market for breaching the legislation.
In 2018, the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) analysed cigarette emissions at the filter level. It was found that not only was the nicotine level absorbed by smokers much higher than the manufacturers indicated, but that other emissions, such as tar and carbon monoxide levels, were also present at levels much higher than those officially reported.
Contents much higher than those displayed on the packages
RIVM is questioning the micro-perforations placed on the filters by cigarette manufacturers. In classic tests, carried out by manufacturers with "smoking machines", these micro-perforations let air through and allow for relatively low levels to be obtained, which are reported on cigarette packets. However, when a smoker places his fingers or lips on the filter, he blocks these micro-perforations and the concentrations of nicotine, tar and other toxic substances, such as carbon monoxide (CO), are then 2 to 26 times higher.
After RIVM brought the case to court, the Rotterdam judge in charge of the case demanded that the Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) examine, within six weeks, whether the emissions measured at the end of cigarette filters are in fact in line with the maximum levels permitted by European regulations.[1]. Otherwise, the filter cigarettes concerned should be withdrawn from the Dutch market. This judgment echoes a decision of the European Court of Justice, which reached the same conclusions in February 2022.
Misleading measurements of smoking machines
The use of “smoking machines,” developed by the tobacco industry and sometimes used by control bodies, has been criticized for several decades, as has the use of these micro-perforations on filters. The European Commission encourages its members to check the different contents present in cigarettes, without having approved a standardized measurement method. Peter van den Driest, a local spokesperson for Philip Morris, had declared in 2018 that these machines did not measure actual exposure, but were "intended to make brands comparable when cigarettes are smoked identically"[2], which strongly resembles a pirouette since the nicotine, tar and CO contents reported on the packets are supposed to come from this measurement and inform smokers.
In France, these indications of the so-called nicotine, tar and CO content disappeared in 2016 when plain packaging was introduced for all tobacco products, because studies had shown that they misled consumers about the real content of these substances in cigarettes. The debate, led by associations from several countries, is currently to request the deletion These cigarette "filters", whose name itself is misleading since they do not filter any particles, give a false sense of security to smokers even though the risks seem to be aggravated by the presence of the filter and generate significant and persistent pollution.
Cigarette filters and butts are in fact one of the most common types of waste in the world; it is estimated that 4,000 billion of these cigarette butts end up on the ground every year and end their journey in rivers and oceans. Composed of cellulose acetate, a form of plastic, filters have been subject to the European directive on single-use products since 2019.
Decryption - Should filters in cigarettes be banned? Keywords: filter, tar, carbon monoxide, plastic, NetherlandsMF
[1] Cigarette testing method may downplay tar, nicotine content, court rules, DutchNews, published November 4, 2022, accessed November 7, 2022. [2] Anti-tobacco groups threaten court to get 'too unhealthy' cigarettes banned, DutchNews, published on 1er August 2018, accessed November 7, 2022. National Committee Against Smoking |