In 2010, investigators from the USA and Japan came to conclusion that ‘the shift from non filter to filter cigarettes appears to have merely altered the most frequent type of lung cancer, from squamous cell carcinoma to adenocarcinoma’ in the International Journal of Cancer. There were many researches about this ‘filter problem’.
This could be one of the reasons why in some countries unfiltered cigarettes cost more than filtered. Moreover, another opinion is that unfiltered cigarette brands use higher quality tobacco and in that way remove the need for filtration. In addition, a smoker will need to smoke more filtered cigarettes in order to reach the desired percentage of nicotine.
Lucky strike cigarettes for sale full#
An unfiltered cigarette will provide the smoker with full nicotine capacity, while filtered one will reduce all the additives. What is the catch?Įvery day smokers need their usual nicotine dosage per day. Even though filters really do reduce nicotine and tar while inhaling, filters cigarettes are not proven healthier than filterless ones.
Later it was shown as the main cause of lung cancer, and that is why now filters are made of cellulose acetate, which is the same material that we use for making camera film. The filter firstly consisted of asbestos, material that is non-flammable and insoluble. Their initial purpose was health protection of a smoker, by reducing tar and nicotine intake while inhaling. When the public was introduced with many diseases caused by smoking, especially lung cancer, cigarette companies made a shift in design and created filters. What is the main difference between the two?īefore the 1950s, unfiltered cigarettes were the only choice for smokers. Some say that the ones without filter are healthier, other think they are way to strong and in addition, there is a bigger possibility of developing lung cancer. There are many contrasting opinions when it comes to choosing between cigarettes with or without the filter.