Talk:List of additives in cigarettes

message: I noticed that this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cigarette_smoke_carcinogens only lists 33 known carcinogens, while "List_of_additives_in_cigarettes" states 69. Which one is it? All of the articles surrounding cigarette smoke seem to be very outdated, and the sources don't agree with each other. There's a big difference between 33 and 69 and it would be nice if someone could find a reputable source with a definitive figure.
Thoraxcorp (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Discrepancies Among Other Articles Related to the Topic

message: I was wondering why cigarettes recently have been going out while being smoked.  was something taken out of them, as an additive that kept them from going out? or was something added to them such as some sort of flame retardant?   Please help me with this I have been researching this for a while now.
ddsurfscaDdsurfsca 10:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ddsurfsca 

message: :"...all these chemical compounds have been approved as additives to food..."
Now, I may be wrong on this, but I'm fairly sure Ammonia is not an approved additive to food, you know with being a carcinogen and all. Please clarify. --George The Man 02:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Some of the accelerates were removed as part of the agreements with many European countries that have banned additives to cigarettes. It's cheaper to not buy them at all than to buy them just for the manufacturing process for US use cigarettes because of the quanty discounts. Poor DJCC. Philip Morris is the only one I know of that still uses them in some American cigarettes. Lostinlodos 03:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Erm...

message: There is a huge difference between cigarette additives and (mainstream) smoke consituents. The latter being the result of the combustion of the former. I am removing the merge tag. Popo le Chien 08:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No merge

message: Will someone please explain to me why the cigarette companies have to add up to 599 additives? how many chemicals can be used to enhance flavour? or whatever they are used for. 599 just seems way too much.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.117.202 (talk) 23:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As in why do they still?, Because the American Big 6 (including the five listed here), made agreements with American chemical manufactures INCLUDING DUPONT, many years ago that are sill valid. The reason the harmful chemicals have not been ordered to be removed from the otherwise relatively-safe tobacco, officially is because, as stated above, there are all cleared ON THEIR OWN for FOOD consumption, though I recognize other reasons that wouldn't fit in a wikipedia page including this talk board. ;) Lostinlodos (talk) 11:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah but speaking from a strictly chemical standpoint, thats an  extremely stupid  reason. Burning something then inhaling it is vastly different than eating it. Even something simple and safe like silicon dioxide (a component of sand) can be carcinogenic and will cause respiratory problems when inhaled. Additionally, many compounds change into something totally else while undergoing pyrolysis ... For example, its not out of the question to wonder if the benzaldehyde in the Almond oil (on the list) could react with d/l-Alanine (on the list) to produce the mild stimulant drug phenylpropanolamine - right in the cigarette as it burns, depending on if whatever else in there catalyzed it or inhibited it... and those are just two substances from the first letter of the list!!! Zaphraud (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why so many?

message: Can someone please translate this article into english? Thanks. Drahcir my talk 02:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, layman's terms for many of these chemicals would be helpful, or grouping them into families that can be labled with layman's terms. --160.79.83.254 (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

text: of course the only thing cigarettes don't contain is apparently tobacco The Impartial Truth (talk) 06:41, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ummmm... 

message: Why is there no link to an article listing brands of additive free cigarettes and why does Wikipedia not have such an article?  I discovered a Wikipedia article on Natural American Spirit additive free cigarettes but no link to it from this article.  And Wikipedia may have other such articles that are unknown to me.  Isn't it likely that readers will come to this fine article that you have written looking for a list of additive free brands containing only tobacco and would want such an article?  Thank you.
rumjal 08:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Standard Winston cigarettes are not additive free. They have rebranded some of the American Spirit line as part of the Winston line only, which are also sold as RJ Free. Lostinlodos (talk) 14:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Additive Free

message: I had a thing on my talk page about it.
Maybe that we could delete :Category:Cigarette additives and then make there have a redirect from the category.
~~EBE123~~ 21:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of category and redirect 

message: I can't believe how much is in one cigarette.  That is so gross!!! It is amazing how these chemicals were not tested when they were burned!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.24.200 (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is a list of what could be added to tobacco in 1994. This is not all found in a regular cigarette.  The Impartial Truth (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gross 

message: Since ammonia is a gas ... Some knowledge of chemistry is really helpful. --Shisha-Tom (talk) 17:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of ammonia could be difficult 

message: The list was prepared from documents almost two decades old.  Everything pertaining to cigaret additives changed in 2009, when the federal government banned the sale of flavored cigarets.Euonyman (talk) 22:46, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  list is out of date 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of additives in cigarettes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070607201251/http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_information/asp/healthy_living/lifestyle/smoking/relationship/ingredients_text.asp to http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_information/asp/healthy_living/lifestyle/smoking/relationship/ingredients_text.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: See this diff. 
"at least 69 can cause cancer." This is true for some additives in cigarettes in some countries. Wikipedia always wants the international perspective.
Some American brands are sold in other nations. See: Marlboro (cigarette), and:
*Marlboro's brand still one of world's best. By Alanna Petroff. May 27, 2015. CNN.
It looks like many of these chemicals are found in cigarettes outside the USA too. See:
*What's in a cigarette? By Cancer Research UK.
--Timeshifter (talk) 04:07, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see the purpose of including an anti-smoking PSA image in a list article about materials added to tobacco. Mfernflower (talk) 03:25, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It further illustrates the deadly dangers of some of those chemicals as discussed in the article. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Additive-free tobacco is only marginally less hazardous than your standard mass-produced affair  https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/27/5/498  so I feel your idea is rather misguided. Mfernflower (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That article from bmj.com does not prove the relative hazard of cigarettes with and without added chemicals. That is not even what the article is about. It is about the effect of advertising. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images should be discussed before being removed. 

message: . You deleted this reference: "599 Ingredients That Can Be Found in Cigarettes." By Terry Martin. November 15, 2016.
See diff. I wrote in my edit summary before you reverted me: "Sources are listed at the end of the article. They are high-quality sources."
It seems you ignored that, and reverted me. Sources listed at the end of the article are high quality:
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2000 Surgeon General's Report Highlights: Tobacco Products.
2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Selling Tobacco Products in Retail Stores.
3. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - An Overview.
4. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco. General & Brand Specific Ingredients. 2020.
5. National Cancer Institute. Harms of Cigarette Smoking and Health Benefits of Quitting.
The article contains "The List of 599 Additives in Cigarettes (1994)". It gives the history of how that list came out. 
The article also has this: "To date, 7,000 chemical compounds have been identified in cigarette smoke, including about 250 harmful and 69 carcinogenic chemicals." Reference #5 backs that up. That info is in the Wikipedia article too. 
Next time please read and understand the edit summary. And please stop the edit warring. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:16, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article: "599 Ingredients That Can Be Found in Cigarettes"