By John Lee, Pirate News TV, 18 July 2008.

A review of US patents filed by tobacco corporations revealed that
vinegar can be used to neutralize nicotine.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6694985.html
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4729390.html

This fact can be used to break the cycle of addiction to nicotine
(alkaloid), by applying vinegar to tobacco cigarettes. Patents use
proprietary acetic acids (acetones) in order to charge a high price
for inventions, while vinegar (acetic acid) is cheap and cannot be
patented. Vinegar is safer than untested chemicals manufactuered by
Eastman Kodak.

Vinegar can be applied by the addict to cigarette filters or tobacco,
or it can be applied covertly by concerned friends and family. White
vinegar is invisible when applied to cigarette filters. It can be
applied via medicinal dropper (Pasteur pipette).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasteur_pipette

Vinegar is an acid (low pH) and nicotine is an alkaloid base (high
pH). Chemistry 101 teaches that acids neutralize bases. Vinegar and
other acids are used to wash the tobacco leaves to neutralize the
nicotine, or added to cigarette filters to neutralize the acids in
the smoke, by bringing the pH closer to 7.0 (neutral). Vinegar
(acetic acid) has a pH of 2.4.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PH

Vinegar is commonly used as a salad dressing and for various health
cures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinegar
http://www.bragg.com/products/applecidervinegar.html

Applying vinegar to tobacco might affect the taste more than applying
it to the filter. Applying dark vinegar to tobacco is more covert
than applying to a white filter. Application of clear white vinegar
to a filter is relatively covert. Application to the filter
neutralizes all smoke passing through the filter. Application to
tobacco only neutralizes nicotine at the beginning of the cigarette.

Cost of vinegar is less than $10, including a $1 medicine dropper.

Dosage of acid to neutralize nicotine can be as low as 1% by weight,
up to 10%, according to US patents.

Addicts, by definition, cannot stop their addiction. Dr. David Drew
Pinsky, host of the TV shows Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew and
Strictly Sex with Dr. Drew. Dr Pinsky describes all addicts as
feeling suicidal unless or until they get their next fix of whatever
drug they are addicted to, including alcohol or nicotine.

Addicts are classified as insane by both the medical industry and the
judicial industry, which profits greatly from addition. Tobacco
addiction is routinely used as a torture device by police during
interrogations, by withholding tobacco from the addicts until they
confess, or falsely confess. Drug addicts total more than half of all
prison inmates, at a cost to taxpayers of $50,000 per year per
inmate. Drug rehab facilities charge about $50,000 per treatment.

Incarceration is the only "treatment" used to cure addicts, in prison
or in psychiatric lockdowns, with virtually zero success. In fact,
traditional "treatments" for all addictions result in higher
incidence of suicide and fatal overdose.

Medical doctors are the leading cause of death in USA, with over 2.5-
million murders.
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm

Most addition treatment programs fail to make any attempt at treating
tobacco addiction, and freely supply unlimited tobacco to inmates.
Tobacco is the number one gateway drug leading to other addictions.

So-called alternative treatments cure patients by eliminating
malnutrition.
http://www.healthrecovery.com/HRC_2006/OpeningPage.htm

Church of Scientology runs a relatively successful addiction
treatment system called Narconon, which use sauna for a potentially
fatal six hours of detoxification per day, plus nutrition, for a cost
of $50,000.
http://piratenews.org/ChurchOfScientologySatanicSexSlaveCult.html

Home saunas cost about $500 or less, and can be safely used for 15
minutes per day. A heater can be used in a small bathroom to create a
DIY sauna.

Nicotine reaches the brain within 6 seconds after inhalation. Ammonia
is added to tobacco to freebase the pH of nicotine to make it pass
through the blood-brain barrier faster and in higher amounts, to make
it more addictive. Ammonia is a base (alkaline), which further raises
the alkalinity of nicotine (alkaloid).

Can cigarettes really be compared to Crack?
http://jdlee.com/art2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia

Thus tobacco corporations can sell more cigarettes to addicts and
reap higher profits. Tobacco addicts spend $300,000 on 500,000
tobacco cigarettes during their lifetime, not counting inflation or
tax increases.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23669897-24331,00.html

Smokers are killed 10 years early, though some are killed in their
20s. My own grandmother died from mouth cancer at age 32, thanks to
smoking.
http://www.kansan.com/stories/2008/apr/08/smokeout_focuses_students08/

Tobacco lobbyists bribe politicians to pass laws exempting tobacco
corporations from publishing a list of ingredients in tobacco
products.

Note that tobacco addicts are often alcoholics. Nicotine (alkaloid)
somewhat counteracts the effects of alcohol (metabolized to acetic
acid). However, both are stimulants is lower doses for non-
alcoholics, when their effect is additive.
http://www.geocities.com/prohibition_us/lawsamok.html

"Neuronal activity is stimulated by low concentrations and depressed
by high concentrations of alcohol."
-Biology of Alcoholism, edited by B. Kissin and H. Beglleiter, R.G.
Grenell, "Effects of Alcohol on the Neuron"

"Most studies of nerve conduction and transmission, EEG records, and
behavioral performance indicate stimulant actions of low doses and
depressant actions at high doses."
H. Wallgren and H. Barry, "Actions of Alcohol"

Use of vinegar on tobacco may reduce the ability of nicotine to
neutralize alcohol. Beer has a pH of 4.5, which is more acidic than
acid rain (5.0).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PH

Alcohol can be neutralized by adding minerals like calcium and
magnesium (but not phosphate), such as in Miracle 2 Neutralizer
liquid.
http://www.miracle2.net/product/product_m2neutralizer.asp

Alcoholics are hypoglycemic or diabetic (keto acidosis). So drinking
filtered or distilled water, and eating regular snacks of nutritious
foods, is even more critical to survival. Juicing vegetables raises
alkalinity due to high mineral content, jucing fruits adds acidity
despite high mineral content.

Contact author John Lee with results from your experiments:
piratenews@...

=====================================================================

"The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total number of
deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per
year. Using Leape's 1997 medical and drug error rate would add
another 216,000 deaths, for a total of 999,936 deaths annually. It is
now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of
death and injury in the US."
—Gary Null, PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora
Rasio, MD; Dorothy Smith, PhD, Life Extension Magazine, "Death by
Medicine", March 2004 (plus 1.5-Million annual aborticides in USA)
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm

-------------------------------------------------------------------



Can cigarettes really be compared to Crack?

by David Lee
http://jdlee.com/art2.htm

The modern American cigarette is to tobacco what crack is to cocaine.

We've all heard that crack can addict on the first try. We've all
been disgusted by the pregnant moms who prostitute themselves for
another hit of this mysterious substance. But I've wondered what made
crack so potent to overpower a mother's maternal instincts to protect
her unborn child, and I've doubted that cigarettes really could ever
be compared to a substance that leads one to kill, rob, or
prostitute. After all, who's been murdered for a Marlboro?

But still the statistics tell us that more people can quit cocaine,
crack or heroin than nicotine. Most smokers, when asked, say they
wish they had never started.

I've also struggled with the tobacco companies' arguments that their
product is not addictive because fifty million Americans have quit
and because one million Americans quit each year. But, just as they
say their products are only like gummy bears, they recently maintain
that their use of ammonia, a primary ingredient in urine, is only to
improve a cigarette's taste.1 Rat poison was also used to improve
taste in pipe tobacco.2 The tobacco companies have never officially
disclosed their addition of ammonia, which has only come to light in
the recent cigarette litigation. It is not a natural constituent of
tobacco. The importance of that additive is not fully understand and
appreciated by the public and by our decision makers.

For example, I recently met a FDA employed, M.D./Ph.D. at the annual
convention for the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. I
asked this imminently qualified gentleman the following: "What does
ammonia do?" He did not know and could only state that ammonia is a
base. But my question was overheard by Dr. James Pankow, whom I
credit with the epiphany that the modern American cigarette is to
tobacco what crack is to cocaine.

Dr. Pankow quickly asked that I call him "Jim" and explained that the
basis for the comparison between the modern cigarette and crack
cocaine is the chemical process of "free basing," which is
accomplished by the additive ammonia. This process is used by most
tobacco companies3 and was used by Richard Pryor when he accidentally
set himself on fire several years ago.

To understand the chemical process, imagine a birthday party balloon
held down with a string. This is like the nicotine molecule in its
natural state. This molecule is relatively heavy, and does not
evaporate easily. The "freed" nicotine molecule is like the "freed"
helium balloon whose string has been cut loose.4 It
ultimately "disassociates" from the tobacco upon heating or burning
at lower temperatures and in greater amounts. Although simplified,
the following explanation of this chemical process is accurate enough
for us lay people. A base picks up hydrogen atoms from other
molecules. Hydrogen atoms are what "weigh down" the nicotine or
cocaine molecules. Ammonia, a base, has the chemical composition NH3,
or one nitrogen atom bound to three hydrogen atoms. When ammonia is
added to nicotine, ammonia picks up one additional hydrogen atom from
the nicotine molecule and becomes NH4.5

The free base process simultaneously matches the PH of the tobacco
smoke to the PH of the lungs. Neutral PH is 7.0 which is the PH of
water or H2O. PH is the measure of a substance's relative propensity
to take or give away hydrogen atoms. The PH of the lungs is 7.4. (The
PH of the mouth is lower or acidic, and thus the reverse process is
used for chewing tobacco.) Bioavailability is maximized by matching
the PH of the nicotine to the PH of the membranes through which the
nicotine must pass before flowing in the bloodstream.6

Richard Pryor understood how to apply Dr. Pankow's balloon analogy.
He free based cocaine by mixing cocaine, ammonia and ether (and some
water). The ether rises to the top of the mixture, along with
the "freed" cocaine. The NH4 stays below in the water. The cocaine
and ether are siphoned off with a spoon and should be left to dry.
Although ether has characteristics that make it an effective vehicle
to separate the freed cocaine, it is also extremely flammable. In
Richard Pryor's haste and inebriation, he failed to allow the ether
to evaporate away by itself and instead accidentally lit the ether
and himself.7

Crack, unlike Richard Pryor's method of free basing cocaine, uses
baking soda (also a base) to accomplish the same chemical end result.
We've all heard that crack is inexpensive, but why? This is because
baking soda is much easier to obtain than ammonia and ether. It's
dangerous because it can be mass produced and consumed without the
danger of self-pyrolization. But cigarettes with ammonia have one
important "advantage," and therefore danger of addiction, over crack.
With crack, the user is at the disadvantage of lighting a pipe upon
every inhalation. With freed-based nicotine, the smoker conveniently
has freely burning tobacco without need for a pipe. Natural tobacco,
including pipe and cigar tobacco, does not stay lit. To accomplish
the continuously burning cigarette, the cigarette companies have
perfected the burn rates of cigarette paper and even "puff" the
tobacco with chemically inert substances such as Freon 11.

The civil liability significance of ammonia cannot be overstated. It
is ammonia and thus "free basing" that turns heads at the Department
of Justice. It may even have been the decisive point in the industry
handing over to Mississippi $170 million in the first of perpetual
installments.8 It will be interesting to see the eight Liggett group
documents that a Florida trial judge ruled must be disclosed under
the fraud/crime exception to the attorney-client privilege and
without which the state of Florida refuses to settle on otherwise the
same terms as Mississippi. The Florida Court of Appeals recently
upheld that order to disclose those documents, and thus Florida
joined Minnesota and Mississippi in ruling that the lawyers and their
tobacco clients were prima facie guilty of fraud and criminal
activity.

When ABC News settled the libel suit brought against it for reporting
that the tobacco companies add nicotine, it should have consulted the
cigarette plaintiffs' attorneys before paying millions. The tobacco
companies don't need to add nicotine. The taste of nicotine is awful.
It burns the throat. When nicotine is handled by the barrel, full
toxic waste dress, including respirators, must be worn. Nicotine is
used in some countries as a pesticide. It can make one nauseous.
Thus, the cigarette companies have no fear of lowering nicotine, as
long there's ammonia.

To what extent does ammonia boost nicotine in the bloodstream?
Remember that the FTC method of measuring nicotine only does so in
the tobacco, not in the bloodstream where the level is important. Dr.
Pankow's research is found in a study in the August issue of
Environmental Science and Technology, a publication of the American
Chemical Society, and can show that the amount of nicotine available
to a smoker could be increased by 100 times.9

The free basing process is also significant, I believe, to understand
how Phillip Morris overtook R.J. Reynolds. Marlboro went from an
obscure brand 40 years ago to today's single most "valuable" consumer
product appraised at over $40 billion. Marlboro has particularly
high "brand loyalty." R.J. Reynolds, which used to have over 50
percent of the market, now has about 20 percent. A now publicized
document written in the early 1970s by RJR researchers suggested that
the popularity of Marlboro was attributed to Phillip Morris'
manipulation of nicotine.10

Another part of the Phillip Morris history is Ron Tamol, a
biochemical researcher hired by Phillip Morris in 1950s or 1960s. Mr.
Tamol's handwritten notes used to prepare for a presentation to the
head of Phillip Morris state "Determine minimum nicotine drip to hook
smoker." (If you saw the NBC News coverage in the spring of 1996 of
these personal notes, then you saw my thumb as I held those notes for
the camera.) Mr. Tamol's presence with Phillip Morris coincides with
the beginning of the steady rise of Marlboro's market share.

Between the economic dependence that we as a state have on tobacco
farming, the high rate of smoking, and the marriage of tobacco
lobbying to backroom political muscle at the highest levels of our
state government, Tennessee's political elite is in state-wide denial
of the damage of tobacco. The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention estimated that in 1990 the direct cost to Tennessee caused
by smoking was $782 million per year. This number accounts not only
for Tenncare costs to treat smoking diseases but also lost wages and
lost tax revenues.

The average smoker dies 22 years earlier than the average nonsmoker.
Tennessee ranks third in the nation for smoking related cancer deaths
at a rate of 442.1 per 100,000 deaths. Tennessee, without
coincidence, also ranks third in the nation for smoking prevalence.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer in Tennessee and causes
3,800 Tennesseans to die each year.

It has been widely reported in the national press that Tennessee is
not one of the states that sued the tobacco companies. Even though
our immensely qualified and Harvard-educated attorney general has not
brought suit, this does not preclude a suit on behalf of Tennessee
taxpayers. Considering his appointment by the elite of a tobacco
state, his position is akin to a conflict of interest. Likewise,
would not one of our clients allege malpractice against us if we
failed to file suit to ensure that the client recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars in compensation per year?

Under Tennessee law, the right of a taxpayer to recover, on behalf of
the state, public funds utilized under circumstances in which these
funds are due to be returned to the state is well established.
Plaintiffs can maintain standing in this action, after (1) having
made an attempt to have the action brought by the appropriate
government official, and (2) showing that the acts of public
officials affected a special interest or caused the plaintiffs a loss
not a common injury to the public generally. It is necessary that the
public official has unreasonably or improperly refused to bring the
suit.11 Tennessee's Medicare suit is not the only such case to be
brought by taxpayers. Alabama, Ohio, and recently North Carolina
taxpayers brought suit. San Francisco was the first city to sue. Even
trade unions have brought suit. Thus on May 8, 1997, or six weeks
before the settlement, J.D. Lee and I filed such a taxpayer
or "medicare" action on behalf of Tennessee taxpayers.

But such class actions brought by third parties with their "top-down"
or statistical view of the damages of smoking are much different from
the individual smoker looking up at the tobacco giant and
crying "it's your fault." The giant has crushed over 300 meager
individuals with the classic "personal responsibility" argument.

The first individual case was Cooper v. RJ Reynolds in 1954. Mr.
Cooper died of lung cancer. His wife alleged the RJ Reynolds
representations lead to Mr. Cooper's continued smoking. Those
representations contained in mass advertisements in the 1940s and
1950s were 1) "20,000 Doctors say that `Camel' Cigarettes are
Healthful" and 2) "'Camel' Cigarettes are Harmless to the Respiratory
System."12

The industry's win record on individual cases continued until it
faced an easy going, asbestosis defense lawyer turned tobacco
plaintiff lawyer by the name of Woody Wilner. His recent experience
in Florida offers hope for the Tennessee trial lawyer. In the fall of
1996 he won $750,000 for Mr. Grady Carter who had lung cancer caused
by cigarettes. The trial lasted a brief two weeks which suggests that
simplicity and modesty wins. No punitive damages were claimed.
Because he had made a offer of judgment for $50,000 (Florida's rule
is similar to Tennessee's new Rule 68 that allows a plaintiff to make
such an offer), the trial court has granted Mr. Wilner another $1.7
million for fees and expenses.

Ammonia is important for another reason. The Restatement of Torts
where it discusses tobacco makes the distinction between good tobacco
and bad tobacco. I wonder how Prosser would view cigarettes that have
freon and ammonia and that are marketed to children. Ninety percent
of current smokers began before they were 18, or old enough to be
able to appreciate the danger.

Do the cigarette companies have a common law duty to reduce that
danger and make their products as safe as they can? There is a former
researcher who pinpointed what in cigarette smoke caused heart
disease and developed a means to neutralize that constituent. His
research was silenced because making a "safer" cigarette meant
admitting that cigarettes were dangerous.

The tobacco companies were the original financial backers of
the "tort-deform" movement and are the mothers of all tortfeasors.
They were the first to finance lawyer bashing. They have always had
the most to lose in a courtroom, the most to hide from a jury, and
the most money to spend on "public education." They have been the
principal enemy of the jury system.

In a Wall Street Journal article published before the settlement, the
trial lawyers were praised. This article said that whatever bad the
public may say about the trial lawyers, all must agree that only the
trial lawyers were able to bring the tobacco companies to the
negotiating table; not the politicians, the health groups, nor the
federal government. Whatever your view of the settlement, all must
admit that the tobacco culture will never be the same.

Endnotes

1 This article is reprinted with permission of the Tennessee Trial
Lawyers Association and can be found at 17(4) TENN. TRIAL LAW. 10-12
(Winter 1998).
2 N.Y. TIMES, July 30, 1997.
3 See the Wigand deposition.
4 Jeffrey Wigand's deposition, November 29, 1995. See
http:\\www.gate.net/~jcannon/documents/wigand.html, or search from
www.tobacco.org/. See also John Schwartz, Ammonia Amplifies Nicotine,
Study Confirms, WASH. POST, July 20, 1997, at A4; Barry Meier,
Ammonia Linked to a Type of Nicotine, N.Y. TIMES July 30, 1997, at
A18; and see generally the research of Dr. James Pankow, Oregon
Graduate Institute of Science and Technology.
5 Dr. James Pankow.
6 Credit must also be given to my wife, Lubov Mikalovna Kudraseva
Lee, and her chemistry professors at the University of Tennessee for
their independent confirmation and explanation of the nicotine
molecule before and after ammoniation.
7 This is according to another imminent M.D./Ph.D. whom I met at the
SRNT symposium and whose identity I prefer to remain anonymous.
8 Dr. James Pankow.
9 The settlement is worth over $3 billion in the first 25 years but
goes on forever.
10 See also Schwartz and Meier, supra note 4.
11 Barry Meier, Politics; Minnesota Official Invites Congressional
Scrutiny of Tobacco Industry, N.Y. TIMES, July 28, 1997.
12 See Bennett v. Stutts, 521 S.W.2d 575 (Tenn. 1975).
13 See http://www.tobacco.org/documents/560524cooper.html.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6694985.html

Process for lowering nicotine contents in tobacco

Document Type and Number:
United States Patent 6694985

Abstract:

A process for lowering toxic substance including nicotine in tobacco
is disclosed. The process of the present invention comprises treating
tobacco leaves with water, alcoholic drink, or a mixture thereof. It
is also possible to lower the nicotine contents of tobacco by using
licorice vinegar. Loess water, licorice, black beans, other vinegar
than licorice vinegar, or salt can be added or as a mixture thereof
in order to maintain the unique flavor and taste of tobacco.

Claims:

1. A process for lowering nicotine content in tobacco comprising the
steps of: mixing Korean coarse liquor, licorice vinegar and water;
dipping tobacco leaves in the mixture; and fermenting the tobacco
leaves in a temperature range of 18° C.˜30° C. for 24˜72 hours.

2. The process according to claim 1, wherein the mixture contains
water, Korean coarse liquor and licorice vinegar in the volume ratio
of 100:5˜15:0.1˜5.

3. The process according to any one of claim 1 or 2 wherein Korean
coarse liquor and licorice vinegar are mixed and ripened first and
then mixed with water.

4. The process according to claims 1 or 2 wherein the mixture
contains further loess, licorice, black beans, vinegar or salt.

===================================================================


US Patent 4729390 - Tobacco smoke filtering material

TECHNICAL FIELD

This invention relates to a tobacco smoke filtering material for
selectively removing deleterious materials from tobacco smoke without
at the same time removing desirable smoke vapors which contribute to
aroma and taste. More particularly, this invention concerns a novel
cigarette filter tow and filters made therefrom, as well as the
method for their manufacture, which will selectively remove nicotine
from cigarette smoke.

Throughout the history of cigarette filtration, there has been a
desire to selectively remove nicotine from tobacco smoke due to its
toxicity. As of the present time, the use of a tobacco smoke filter
element placed on the tip of the smoking device is the method or
device most commonly used for removing these undesirable components
from tobacco smoke. These filters, which normally consist of a bundle
of cellulose acetate, convoluted crepe paper, cotton, or combinations
of these products formed into a cylindrical plug, are designed to and
do remove varying proportions of the liquid-solid particles passing
through them, thereby greatly reducing the amount of undesirable
materials reaching the smoker's mouth.

Most prior known fibrous filters show no selectivity for the removal
of nicotine from the smoke of a cigarette, particularly when the
tobacco involved is the conventional type used on domestic cigarettes.

For example, if one of these filters removes 25% of the tar, it also
removes about 25% of the nicotine; if it removes 40% of the tar, it
also removes about 40% of the nicotine. Therefore, it can be said
that these show no selectivity for removing nicotine over tar.

It has been suggested that one way to make a fibrous filter of
cellulose acetate, paper or cotton remove a higher percentage of
nicotine than tar from cigarette smoke is to coat the fibers in the
filter with acids and particularly with nontoxic, nonvolatile organic
acids such as tannic acid, citric acid, glutaric acid and the like.
However, such a technique leaves something to be desired from the
standpoint of the taste of the filter. Also, in the case of filters
of cellulose acetate fibers, the addition of an acid can cause
hydrolytic degradation of the fibers on prolonged contact. As a
result, acetic acid can be released from the filter giving it an
objectionable odor and taste.

U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,417,759 and 3,424,173 describe cigarette filter
elements consisting of fibrous filters containing liquid additives
(1,4 butanediol and 1,2,4 butanetriol respectively) that selectively
remove nicotine from cigarette smoke.

According the the present invention a convenient and effective method
has been found by which a tobacco smoke filter can be constructed for
the selective removal of nicotine from tobacco smoke. This method
consists of coating or otherwise dispersing a particular coating
compound on the filtering material from which the tobacco smoke
filter element is formed.

Therefore, this invention provides tobacco smoke filters which remove
a higher percentage of nicotine than tar from tobacco smoke. Also,
this invention provides additives for a tobacco smoke filter which
impart to the filter an improved capacity for removing nicotine from
tobacco smoke.

The diacetyl tartaric acid esters of monoglycerides may be prepared in
conventional manner by reacting diacetyl tartaric acid anhydride with
monoglycerides. Diacetyl tartaric acid anhydride may be prepared in
conventional manner by reacting acetic anhydride with tartaric acid.
Such reactions and techniques are well known in the art. See, for
example, U.S. Pat. No. 2,938,027.

Commercially available coating compounds described structurally above
include Myverol 18-30 emulsifier (monoglyceride) and Myvatem 30
dispersing aid (diacetyl tartaric acid anhydride ester of
monoglyceride), both marketed by Eastman Chemical Products,
Incorporated. Myverol 18-30 emulsifier is a monoglyceride prepared by
glycerolysis of tallow. Myvatem 30 dispersing aid is the diacetyl
tartaric acid ester of monoglycerides which have been prepared by
glycerolysis of tallow. Both have iodine values of about 30.

The coating compound may be applied to the filter material by
conventional means. It may be applied as a solution, emulsion, melt,
etc. Application from a solution is preferred. The coating compound
may be applied by brush, roller, spraying, or any means known in the
art.

The amount of additive needed to selectively remove the nicotine from
the effluent stream of tobacco smoke has been found to be between 1
and 10% by weight of the filter material. Amounts greater than 10%
tend to make the filter plug wrap "greasy" and interfere with the
adhesives used to bond paper wrap on the filter.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4729390/fulltext.html

===================================================================


Smokers spend about $300,000 on cigarettes in a lifetime

Tamara McLean
May 09, 2008

CIGARETTES put the average Australian smoker about $300,000 out of
pocket in their lifetime, new figures show.

A South Australian infectious disease physician, Dr Ross Philpot, has
run new statistics on the physical and financial cost of smoking.

By 65, the average 20-a-day smoker will have puffed on 400,000
cigarettes, and by the time they die 500,000 will have been smoked.

This costs each smoker about $300,000, a "sobering" figure that all
doctors should remind their patients of to help them quit, he said.

"In my three decades of experience, I have noted that an accumulated
intake of a quarter of a million cigarettes usually results in at
least some cough, breathlessness and wheeze and decreased exercise
tolerance," he wrote in the latest Medical Journal of Australia.

"Half a million cigarettes generally causes chronic smoker's
bronchitis, with or without some degree of emphysema…while three-
quarters of a million cigarettes makes cancer a distinct possibility."

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23669897-24331,00.html

===================================================================

Pirate News TV
http://piratenews.org