We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Opposition to Banning Cigarette Filters and the Belief That Removing Filters Makes Cigarettes Much More Harmful Among Adults Who Smoke: Findings From the 2022 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey
AI summary Read the abstract
This study analyzed survey data from adults who smoke in four countries, finding that most erroneously believe filtered cigarettes are less harmful than unfiltered ones—a misconception the tobacco industry has cultivated—while the World Health Organization recommends banning cigarette filters as ineffective single-use plastics that pose both health and environmental harms.
More than 90% of manufactured cigarettes worldwide contain filters. Contrary to marketing claims by the tobacco industry, cigarette filters do not offer any health protection from cigarette smoke; however, three-quarters of adults who smoke erroneously believe that cigarettes with filters are much less harmful than cigarettes without filters. To protect public health and the environment, the World Health Organization has recommended that policy-makers consider banning cigarette filters as they are unnecessary single-use plastics.
More Papers Like This
Banning cigarette filters in the United Kingdom: Time to correct misperceptions of harms
AI summary Read the abstract
This commentary argued that the UK Government should use powers under the Tobacco and Vapes Bill to ban cigarette filters, as only a quarter of UK adults correctly understand that filters do not reduce smoking harms. Banning filters would benefit both public health and the environment by eliminating a major source of cellulose acetate microplastic pollution.
Milieueffecten van sigarettenpeuken met en zonder filter: kansen en kennishiaten
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed environmental contaminant release from filtered versus filterless cigarette butts at the request of the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure, concluding that cigarette filters provide no proven health benefit while contributing microplastics to the environment, and that banning filters would likely reduce microplastic pollution without introducing additional environmental harm.
Nitrosamine and nicotine exposure after switching from filtered to unfiltered cigarette smoking: a cross-over clinical trial.
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers conducted a randomized cross-over trial in 29 smokers switching between filtered and unfiltered cigarettes and found no significant difference in urinary cotinine or NNAL nitrosamine biomarkers, suggesting that banning cellulose acetate filters—the most common plastic litter item—would reduce environmental microplastic pollution without meaningfully increasing health risk to smokers.
Time to kick the butt of the most common litter item in the world: Ban cigarette filters
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers argue that cigarette filters, made of cellulose acetate single-use plastic, offer no public health benefit while being the most littered item globally and a significant source of microplastics, toxic chemical leaching, and ecological harm.
Protecting public health and the environment: towards a general ban on cellulose acetate cigarette filters in the European Union
AI summary Read the abstract
This paper reviewed evidence on cellulose acetate cigarette filters, finding that they encourage smoking, are inhaled more deeply, and are a significant source of persistent plastic pollution, supporting calls for a general ban on cellulose acetate filters.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.