By Andrew Holtz

CHICAGO (Reuters Health) - Cigarette smokers who choose brands labeled ``light'' or ``mild'' are not getting what they expect, according to presentations at the 11th World Conference on Tobacco OR Health, held in Chicago, Illinois.

The presenters criticized the labels as bearing little relationship to actual levels of tar inhaled by smokers.

Patti White, of Britain's National Health Service, surveyed more than 1,000 smokers using questionnaires and then further studied a subset of smokers using in-depth interviews and focus groups.

``Over three-quarters of 'light' cigarette smokers had switched from regular brands,'' according to White. Not surprisingly, ``of those who had switched, the most common reason was their concern about their health.''

Yet most smokers did not know how much tar was in their cigarette brand, White said. ``They decide between brands almost exclusively on the basis of descriptive branding: that's 'light,' 'mild,' and 'ultralight,' and on pack color. Smokers find the way in which current yield information is presented difficult to understand and meaningless.''

Even if smokers knew the tar level numbers, National Cancer Institute researcher Donald Shopland explained that the government test results have little health meaning, because smokers do not inhale the same way the test machines do, so they usually are exposed to much more tar than the tests would indicate.

Shopland said rising disease rates among smokers since 'light' cigarettes were introduced demonstrate the failure of the current federal testing system.

``So at a time when we've had this huge decline in the machine measurement of tar and nicotine, and a huge shift measured by some of the cohort studies we've had, during that same period we see an increase in the lung cancer death rates,'' Shopland said.

``And the thing is, this was not just lung cancer. We looked at this in terms of all the smoking-related diseases: heart disease, stroke, other cancers. And in each case, among both men and women, the death rates increased between those two study periods, supposedly when we had a 'safer' cigarette,'' he explained.

Attorney Stephen A. Sheller, who has worked on lawsuits against the tobacco industry, called current tar testing a ''sham.'' Sheller read from testimony he took from R. J. Reynolds tobacco company executive David E. Townsend.

``'Question:''' Sheller read, ``'between the 'high' tar, the 'low' tar and the 'ultralow' tar...which group of cigarettes is safer for people who smoke?' Answer: 'I don't know how to do that. I don't know how to demonstrate whether one product is safer than another, as I've already said. What we have done is we have responded to the scientific community and consumers and the call for lower tar products, and we have delivered a range to consumers of products to choose among.'''

Sheller asked the audience, ``If the vice president of (R. J.) Reynolds can't tell you it's safer, then why are we doing it?''

　　(From Yahoo)