JPS58121786A - Tobacco product - Google Patents

Abstract

(57) [Summary] This bulletin contains application data before electronic filing, so abstract data is not recorded.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION One aspect of the present invention is a cigarette (cigarette) and a cigar (11
In particular, an improved wrapper (such as wrapping paper) that reduces visible sidestream smoke without compromising its properties and manufacturing suitability to satisfy the tastes of smokers. Packaging material) K-related.

During combustion, cigarettes generate two phases of combustion products.

The gas phase consists of a gas such as CO2, and the particle phase consists of droplets of high molecular weight substances that are products of thermal decay.
Configure.

Furthermore, this smoke can be divided into two components. One is the mainstream smoke that passes longitudinally inside the cigarette and reaches the smoker's mouth. This is sidestream smoke released.

Sidestream smoke is not only undesirable for the smoker himself, but is also often a source of nuisance, especially for those around him.

The growing awareness of this problem can be easily seen from the fact that laws restricting smoking in public places have been enacted in various places.

It is therefore clear that there is a consumer market for cigarettes that substantially reduce sidestream smoke.

However, the real demand is not simply a desire for cigarettes with fewer cigarettes.

In order to be successful as a product, K must be acceptable to consumers, and the cigarette must be suitable for mass consumption11. Cigarettes with low side flow are commercially acceptable. In order for it to be effective, four criteria must be met: The degree of reduction in sidestream smoke must be determined by smokers' perception of the reduction, and It must be possible to recognize the reduction as a desirable product benefit. We conducted market research to determine the rate of sidestream smoke reduction needed to achieve such results and found that K requires at least a 50 degree reduction in visible sidestream smoke to gain consumer acceptance. It has been found. On the other hand, it is not desirable for the rate of decrease to exceed 80s to 90%. This is because smokers will quit smoking if they find out that their cigarette is lit.

In addition, the particulate components of sidestream smoke are considered to be a source of nuisance to the smoker and those around him, so cigarettes with reduced sidestream smoke are
It must also reduce the particle content of the side stream.

2. The cigarette must have a favorable wind characteristic, and smokers are generally satisfied that they sacrifice KJiL to reduce side fIt, #1. Therefore, it must maintain the same flavor as the existing Tava: 7# product.

5. Cigarettes must have acceptable performance characteristics, such as the number of puffs, continuity of combustion, ashing properties, and components of mainstream smoke (tar, nicotine). Consumers must be made aware that reduced sideflow cigarettes have similar performance to regular cigarettes. The number of puffs (puffs) possible for cigarettes 14 and above must be the same, and of course the puffs and puffs must remain on, and the ash must be hard enough to not crumble, yet interfere with the normal smoking motion. In addition, modern smokers
If a product with low tar and nicotine content is desired and does not have the same performance as current cigarettes in terms of the above-mentioned parameters, it will be rejected.

Cigarettes must be suitable for mass production.Today, cigarettes that cannot be manufactured at high speed cannot be put on the mass market.
For sideflow reduction cigarettes that are extremely difficult to construct,
has no meaning. Factors to keep in mind include the composition of the tobacco blend, the morphology of the rattan, and the need for increased set-up time on the cigarette machine.

There are generally two solutions to the sidestream smoke reduction problem. One is to reduce the total amount of sidestream material generated. This can be accomplished by reducing the amount of tobacco consumed during the smoking period between puffs, or by reducing the amount of smoke produced during combustion.

US Pat. No. 5,902,504 discloses cigarettes incorporating various tobacco substitutes, such as paper with shredded carbon. However, progress with this initiative has been hampered by the inability to provide an acceptable tobacco alternative for smokers.

Another solution is to reduce the amount of visible sidestream material. In this case, the amount of material released into the atmosphere during static combustion is not reduced, but the particulate-phase sedimentation droplets are reduced and the flow that occurs is therefore made invisible. As a result, the smoke generated is relatively less irritating and is considered to be more acceptable to consumers. This solution has led to several promising proposals for viable sidestream reduction cigarettes.

Most proposals for reducing sidestream smoke have focused on modifying the cigarette wrapper. Kahane proposes a double-wrap cigarette tip consisting of a conventional outer wrapper and an inner wrapper made of an insulating plastic with a low melting point. This configuration was claimed to lower the combustion temperature of the cigarette and lengthen the cold distillation zone, thus making the cigarette more like a pipe or cigar and less harmful to health. Reduction of sidestream smoke was also cited as one of the product's benefits, although this was not an objective of the invention. However, this structure 1
1! is a plastic wrapper. Progress toward commercialization was hampered by concerns that the products of combustion could be toxic. US Pat. No. 4,584,005 proposes a metal-coated wrapper, such as aluminum, iron, or tin. This wrapper produces ash in a cylindrical, intact sheath surrounding the burned and burning tobacco and serves to restrict air flow to only the area through the combustion zone. . Although the patent only contemplates reducing "tar" production through improved tobacco combustion, this arrangement would likely also reduce sidestream smoke. However, when this product was tested, it was found that the resulting ash was so hard that the burning coal was pulled together with the ash and extinguished the cigarette (U.S. Pat. No. 7,444-4). reference). Therefore, this product did not make any progress toward commercialization.

j! A promising proposal is U.S. Patent No. 5,744,4.
There is No. 96. This cigarette is made of special carbon-filled paper (
It has a double wrapper with an inner wrapper made of carbon-filled paper. This product achieves sidestream smoke reduction, but when smoked, it has a strong,
It was found to have a pungent taste. This product also presents manufacturing difficulties due to the carbon-filled paper. Cord-filled paper is difficult to run in cigarette making machines and tends to produce high levels of carbon dust in the working atmosphere. Therefore, this proposal also failed to make any commercial progress.

A completely new type of wrapper is proposed in US Pat. No. 4.12t154. This wrapper consists of a single layer of polysaccharide@film, and one of its achievements is the reduction of sidestream smoke.

However, this product was not commercially successful because its appearance was different from regular cigarettes and did not appeal to consumers who wanted a tobacco product similar to existing cigarettes.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,251,377 discloses a single rubber made of paper containing magnesium monoxide.

Testing has determined that this product reduces sidestream smoke, but at the expense of consumer flavor preferences. In addition, this product has a tendency to scatter ash, which is another drawback.

Despite 120 years of development efforts, no satisfactory results have been achieved. The failure of the prior art is eloquently illustrated by the fact that there is no commercially acceptable sidestream smoke reduction cigarette.

The present invention provides unexpected and surprising results in two areas: cigarette wrapper construction and combustion improving additives. Therefore, it will be helpful in understanding the present invention to explain the teachings of the prior art in each of these fields.

Although some previous proposals regarding sideflow reduction cigarettes disclose the use of double wrappers, no causal relationship is taught.

US Pat. No. 1,655,589 and Kan 39 Kan 714 propose two cigarette configurations. That is, the former discloses a composite wrapper composed of two sheets of vegetable fiber material. The inner wrapper of this composite wrapper may be air impermeable (such as D-glassine paper or F-lacing paper) and the outer wrapper is a conventional porous sheet.

This wrapper is said to restrict the airflow through the combustion zone and thus thicken the mainstream smoke. To achieve this result, one inner wrapper is constructed such that it burns very slowly, leaving unburned inner wrappers up to the green k in the combustion zone. The outer wrapper functions to maintain continuity of combustion, provide desirable ash quality, and hide the unsightly appearance of the translucent inner wrapper. Nowhere in this patent is there any mention of reducing sidestream smoke. The invention of this patent also provides that the air-impermeable inner wrapper completely blocks airflow to the tapap stick, thus making the cigarette less prone to extinguishing at the puff-buff interface, i.e. during the non-puff period. There is a problem in that there is. On the other hand, the latter's US patent @&! No. 59 & 714 refers to a reduction in sidestream, but the reason for the reduction in sidestream is that the combustion temperature is lowered and the cold distillation zone after the combustion zone is lengthened. has been done.

The outer wrapper in this patent is also conventional and would have been used to improve appearance and ash quality as in the former patent.

The above-mentioned U.S. Pat. Individually wrapped (wrapped). The outer wrapper simply encloses the final product and maintains the structural integrity of the product.

The outer wrapper of the composite wrapper disclosed in the above-mentioned US Pat. No. 4,744,496 is also provided to hide the unique appearance of the inner wrapper. The carbon-filled paper used for the inner wrapper has a gray color, a color that is not preferred by consumers. The patent cites two advantages of the double wrapper: reduced weight of the cigarette and the same appearance of the cigarette. The inventor did not teach 41 the benefits obtained from the double wrapper and speculated that the reduction in sideflow was due to higher combustion temperatures due to the longitudinal filler.

Although the i-gnesium oxide coated paper disclosed in the above-mentioned U.S. Pat. The reduction in sideflow is attributed solely to the special magnesium oxide coated paper used in the inner wrapper, with only the reduction in weight and the fresh appearance of the cigarettes mentioned.

As mentioned above, according to the teachings of the prior art regarding double-wrapped cigarettes, reducing sidestream smoke requires modification of the wrapping paper, and the modification improves the combustion characteristics of the wrapper and the wrapping paper. This will cause damage to the appearance. The prior art therefore teaches covering the modified paper (inner wrapper) with conventional paper (outer wrapper) to solve the problem.

However, none of the prior art teaches that the dual wrapper itself participates in sidestream smoke reduction as a whole.

A second important feature of the present invention is the effect of combustion modifying additives on sidestream smoke. In this regard, the prior art
They don't mention it at all, and are turning their attention away from solving the problem.

Combustion improving additives (also referred to as combustion improving agents) are well known in the manufacture of cigarettes.

The use of such agents is in recognition of the fact that tobacco and cigarette paper tend to burn unevenly, producing loose, black "fly" ash.

That is, combustion modifying agents are added to the cigarette paper to maintain continuity of combustion, promote uniform combustion, and produce a white, compact ash.

For example, Resnik et al., “Factors Involved in the Static Burning Rate,” 21 Tobacco Science 105 (1977), and Jodl, “Effect of Burning-Improving Additives in Wrapping Paper on the Burning Rate of Cigarettes,” Peitork. Bakforsch, 2
2 (1?49) salts, nitrates and acetates.

The above documents disclose specific effects of various salts,
Their use at concentrations ranging from 0.00 to 3.00 is taught. However, no mention is made of the possibility of effects on sidestream smoke.

Similar teachings are also found in several US patents.

For example, U.S. Pat. No. 2,091,598 states that the use of potassium nitrate to improve combustion behavior is well known and that expanded hydrogen oil was substituted for potassium nitrate to eliminate its harmful firing products and unpleasant taste. is taught to use. U.S. Pat. No. 490 & 671 also propose the use of thermoplastic wrapper materials to reduce nicotine release, and Kt5-28 to enhance combustion.
It teaches adding heavy concentrations of potassium nitrate to the wrapper material, but it does not increase the burning rate of the cigarette excessively.
It states that addition of potassium nitrate at a concentration of 1c2-8% or higher should be avoided in order to prevent this from occurring. Another wrapper material is disclosed in the aforementioned US Pat. No. '412,154. The patent states that the reduction in side flow is brought about by "shrinkage" in the combustion line of the wrapper, and that the film-forming component (wrapper material) contains an alkaline earth metal, preferably carbonized. Although the addition of gnesium or calcium carbide is taught, the percentage of the additive relative to the total weight of the film (wrapper) is not taught. The patent also generally discusses two distinct paper additives that serve distinct functions in cigarette paper: combustion-improving additives such as citrate, and "fillers" such as calcium carbide. .

U.S. Patent Nos. 4744,494 and 4,251,5
No. 77 discloses the role of combustion-improving additives in sidestream smoke reduction, but states that combustion-improving agents cannot function to reduce sidestream unless combined with other chemical additives. It is clearly stated. That is, the former states that combustion improving additives such as 4Ik alkali metal hydroxides, WR#i and carbonates are combined with carbon fillers in the wrapping paper to "synergistically reduce KJ ga smoke flow." The use of conventional fillers such as alkaline earth metal podates, preferably calcium carbonate, is also disclosed to aid in the reduction of sidestream smoke.However, this The patent does not disclose the proportion of the combustion modifier based on the weight of the paper wrapper, but it is within the parameters disclosed in other publications. The latter, U.S. Pat. No. 4,251,377, states that the combustion improving agent is
Disclosed is the aiding sideflow reduction effect of the magnesium oxide filler in the wrapping paper. According to the patent, oxidation! It is said that neither gnesium nor additives (salts) have any effect on reducing sidestream smoke when used alone as fillers or coatings in products, and the patent is , emphasis is placed on the use of sodium citrate, potassium citrate, sodium carbonate and calico carbonate as combustion improving agents in the proportions of O~!L65 - by weight.

The teachings of the above prior art can be summarized as follows.

No commercially acceptable cigarettes with sidestream smoke reduction properties are disclosed.

2. There is no teaching suggesting that double wrapper cigarettes are particularly effective at reducing sidestream smoke.

5. Prior art teachings indicate that alkali metal nitrates and citrates alone cannot effectively reduce sidestream smoke.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION Briefly, the present invention provides a dual wrapper assembly in which at least one wrapper contains a very high proportion of a combustion modifying agent containing approximately 9 to 20 weight percent of an alkali metal salt. The present invention provides a commercially acceptable sidestream smoke reduction cigarette.

It is an object of the present invention to provide a tobacco product that emits less mvc sidestream smoke than conventional tobacco products.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a side 15IE light reduction cigarette that meets the standards of the cigarette manufacturing industry for commercial sale.

DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTS The combustion process of tobacco products has endured years of research and is still not completely understood. Its main variables are known, but their interrelationships are not known in detail.
The present invention achieves unexpected results by utilizing several of these parameters in novel combinations.

FIG. 1 shows the combustion zone of a typical tobacco product, such as a single rubber cigarette. The cigarette itself consists of a tobacco stick 25 wrapped within a paper wrapper 21. The combustion zone is divided into five distinct zones, viz.
It consists of a combustion zone 14, a pyrolysis zone and an ashing zone.

The combustion zone 14 is a zone in which combustion occurs, and behind it is a pyrolysis zone -I11m extending over a length of several millimeters.

The pyrolysis zone generates tobacco 2 by heat from the combustion zone 14.
5 and paper wrapper 21 are decomposed into their respective constituent components. Cigarette ash surrounds the combustion zone 14 and is distributed from the ash twin 22 to the tip 1124k of the cigarette F. There are two distinct types. Tobacco ash 24 is
It is generally loose, flaky, and dark in color. On the other hand, paper ash 25
is a white, relatively hard ash.

Cigarette smoke can be analyzed in two ways. First, from one aspect, the generated smoke has two flow components: mainstream smoke and sidestream smoke. Mainstream smoke is generated when a smoker inhales a cigarette and uses a tobacco stick of 25
It flows along the long plane to the smoker's mouth. Sidestream smoke escapes from the end of the cigarette into the atmosphere. From another perspective, these two component smokes both consist of two phases: a gas phase and a particle phase. The gas phase consists of gases such as C02 and results from relatively complete combustion within combustion zone 14. The particulate phase consists of droplets of high molecular weight compounds. The familiar emanating from the tip of a cigarette is the particulate phase of sidestream smoke, or visible sidestream smoke, which results from pyrolysis within the pyrolysis zone and from the simmer at and just behind the ash line 22. cigarette wrapper 21
It escapes into the atmosphere.

A sidestream smoke reduction cigarette 10 according to the present invention is shown in FIG. The cigarette 10 includes a conventional tobacco stick 13,
It is composed of a two-layer wrapper consisting of an outer wrapper 11 and an inner wrapper 12 that enclose it. Two wrappers <-11,120 While most ingredients can vary widely according to principles well known in the mosquito art, according to the invention at least one of the wrappers ◆1, Contains a high proportion of combustible agents. These important parameters will be detailed later.

Additionally, other well-known techniques for controlling smoke characteristics can be used in the tobacco product. For example, filtration or air dilution means can be included to control tar and tin concentrations. These ki! Modifications to the design will be obvious to those skilled in the art).

Although the mechanism by which the present invention reduces sidestream smoke has not been completely elucidated, the most plausible hypothesis is illustrated in FIG. 5.As seen in FIG. 3, the combustion zone 14 is The paper ash 16 is wrapped inside the ash 17. The paper ash 16 is considered to be particularly hard and impervious to air flow. As a result, the paper ash 16 is The material forming the particulate phase of sidestream smoke is prevented from escaping from the ash line 15 to the atmosphere. It decomposes and exits through the tobacco ash 17 as primarily gaseous, invisible sidestream smoke. The parameters behind this process are detailed below in conjunction with Example WC11 of the present invention.

Two examples of the invention were manufactured and tested against two control cigarettes. Tables ■ and Table ■ show the physical properties of the tested cigarette wrappers (− and
Show test results. The four cigarettes tested were all made of the same tano (complendo) and differed only in the horns of the cigarettes. Control 1 was a cigarette widely sold under the trade name "Win 4 Stone". Control 2 was a conventional 85-inch cigarette with a single wrapper consisting of paper commercially available under product number 719 from Kimberley-Clark Corporation, an Orin Corporation company. It had a double wrapper containing conventional cigarette wrapping paper, commercially available under Product No. 853.

Examples 1 and 2 were prepared according to the principles of the present invention. Example 1 includes an inner wrapper based on reconstituted tobacco material commonly used in small cigars and a conventional [855J
Example 2, based on the data obtained from Example 1, has an outer wrapper consisting of commercial 11C'l paper.
It has a two-layer specialty paper wrapper developed to produce a pourable sidestream smoke reduction cigarette.

Testing of these products focused on the properties necessary to produce a commercially acceptable product. As mentioned earlier, it is important to consider the reduction of sidestream smoke from the perspective of the two images. 1st K, visible sidestream smoke must be reduced by at least 50g6. Second, it is desirable to reduce the tar content of sidestream smoke as much as possible. To determine these properties, each tested tobacco product was first smoked in a standard, well-known smoking chamber. Sidestream smoke was collected in a box. To measure the reduction rate of visible sidestream smoke, a light beam was passed through the box and detected by a 7-otocell. Specifically, the light intensity before the smoke was introduced was compared with the light intensity measured after the sidestream smoke was introduced into the box.
Absorption values, i.e., the amount of light absorbed by sidestream smoke, were measured. Table ■ shows the absolute absorption value and sidestream smoke reduction rate (-) relative to Control Product 1 for each product. In addition, sidestream smoke is measured in "Spectrophotometric Measurement of the R-Slow Efficiency of Cigarette Filters" by C0H, Sloan and J, G, Curran.
The tar content was determined using the technique described in Tobacco Science (May 21, 1981).

Table ■ shows the tar content (da) of sidestream smoke and the tar reduction rate (-) based on control product 1.

Table ■ Ratsu A-K) Table ■ Example 1 . 288 51? 112
44? Example 2. 296 5α5 1
54.7 A comparison of the effects obtained with the product of Example 1 of the invention with that of Control Product 2 shows that replacing the inner wrapper with special paper results in a more dramatic and unexpected effect. It turns out that it has a unique effect. As shown in the table, Control Product 2 (a double wrapper with a conventional paper outer wrapper) reduced sidestream smoke and tar, but
not be reduced to a commercially reasonable degree, and
The double wrapper gives the smoke an undesirable "papery" quality. In contrast, the non-inventive Example 1 reduces visible sidestream smoke by more than 50 degrees and reduces tar by almost half, without sacrificing flavor. The fact that such an effect is obtained cannot be clearly explained based on conventional knowledge. Analyzing the physical properties of Control Products 1 and 2 and Example 1, the most notable difference is that in Inventive Example 1, an order of magnitude higher amount of the combustion improver potassium nitrate was added within the special paper of the inner wrapper. This is what is being done.

The addition of a high proportion of potassium nitrate to this special paper was discovered by chance. This is because it was not added with the intention of promoting combustion; rather, it was added when the cigarette paper was treated with tobacco extract to make the cigarette perform similar to a slender unrolled cigarette. This is because it contained a high concentration of potassium nitrate.

The inner wrapper of Example 1 was analyzed in detail to determine which components of the inner wrapper contributed to the reduction of visible lateral flow. As a result of this analytical study, it was recognized that the combustion improving agent is a component that contributes to sidestream smoke reduction. It was then found that it was possible to dispense with the other special components of the inner wrapper of Example 1, all of which would have increased production costs. Therefore, based on this Example 1 data, the inner wrapper of Example 2 was made to be very similar to conventional paper, except that a high percentage of potassium citrate was added.

Although the preferred embodiment of the present invention uses flax-based paper, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that paper based on wood cellulose or other well-known materials may also be used.

Example 2 was derived from experiments regarding the parameters of the double wrapper in Example 1. The development of Example 2 focused on the addition ratio and composition of the combustion improving agent. Although any of the known combustion modifying agents can be used to achieve the desired effect, potassium citrate has been found to be the best choice. It was also discovered during this experiment that the relatively greater thickness of the inner wrapper of Example 1 and the relatively heavier substrate weight facilitated the reduction of visible sidestream smoke. Since substrate weight is related to the amount of cigarette wrapper that can be wound onto a bobbin used in a high speed cigarette making machine, an attempt was made to reduce the substrate weight of the inner wrapper of Example 2. The lower porosity of the wrapper of Example 2 makes it possible to produce papers with considerably lower substrate weight than the inner wrapper of Example 1, and thus makes the wrapper of Example 2 more suitable for high-speed production. Easy to do.

The percentage of combustion modifying agent required to produce a significant reduction in visible sidestream smoke was also determined by analysis.

FIG. 4 is a graph showing the percent reduction in sidestream smoke as a function of the weight of potassium citrate contained in the inner wrapper of Example 2. As seen in this graph, the visible side flow 5
A concentration of approximately 9 wt. is required to achieve a zero weight reduction. The rate of reduction is maximum at about 20% el) 9 degrees.

Separate experiments also confirmed that the desired concentration was in the range of 9-20%.

The outer wrapper of Example 2 is relatively similar to conventional cigarette paper in terms of substrate weight and thickness, but with a lower porosity and higher proportion of combustion modifying agents obtained from Example 1. I learned the lesson. In developing the wrapper of Example 2, the addition of very high (greater than 9%) percentages of combustion modifying agents to both the inner and outer wrappers may reduce sideflow, but the It has been found that imparting flavor is sacrificed. In addition, the inner wrapper does not contain any or all combustion improving agents.
Addition of high percentages of combustion modifiers to the outer wrapper also provides a sideflow reduction effect, but only when citrate is added at percentages as high as 20 mm. However, if the combustion improving agent is added in such a bulky proportion, it becomes difficult to manufacture paper.

To truly test this tobacco product, we also evaluated it with real smokers. Applying the principles of the invention to well-known cigarette design techniques such as filters and air diluting means results in the same number of puffs per cigarette (m) as in conventional tobacco products.
It produces good ash and has a "low tar" level in terms of tar and nicotine content.
We were able to produce cigarettes that fit On all important criteria of cigarette flavor, consumers rated the cigarettes of the present invention as comparable to several existing cigarette brands.

The present invention has made it possible to achieve a long-sought goal of the cigarette industry. The present invention has enabled the production of commercially acceptable sidestream smoke reduction cigarettes by ignoring the "common sense" of the prior art.

It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the embodiments illustrated herein may be modified in many ways.5 It is also understood that the invention applies not only to cigarettes, but also to cigars, small cigars, and other tobacco products. be able to. k to control smoke parameters.

Filters, air dilution and other techniques can be used. Additionally, the use of tobacco substitutes in a tobacco product does not affect the effectiveness of the present invention.

, Therefore, in this specification, "tobacco" means,
It shall also include tobacco substitutes.

[Brief explanation of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a partially cutaway side view of the burning end of a conventional single rattan cigarette; FIG. 2 is a partially cutaway perspective view of the front end of a sidestream smoke reduction cigarette according to the present invention; Figure 5 is a partially cutaway side view of the front end of the cigarette of Figure 2, and Figure 4 shows the reduction in visible sidestream smoke as a function of the percentage of potassium citrate (96) contained in the inner wrapper of the present invention. This is a graph shown as . 11: Outer wrapper 12: Inner wrapper 13: Tobacco stick (tobacco stuffing)

Claims (1)

[Scope of Claims] 1) Tobacco charge and inner wrapper enclosing the tobacco charge
and an outer wrapper, one of the wrappers containing about 9 to 20 parts by weight of an alkali metal salt. 2) The tobacco product of claim 1, wherein both wrappers contain at least 9 parts by weight of an alkali metal salt. 3) The tobacco product according to claim 1, wherein the alkali metal salt is potassium nitrate. 4) The tobacco product of claim 1, wherein the alkali metal salt is potassium citrate. 5) A tobacco product according to claim Ils 1, 3jJ or 4, wherein the alkali metal salt-containing wrapper is an inner wrapper. 4) A tobacco product comprising a tobacco charge and an inner wrapper and an outer wrapper enclosing the tobacco charge, wherein at least one of the wrappers has a visible sidestream smoke rate of at least 50% compared to a similar conventional tobacco product. A tobacco product characterized in that it contains an alkali metal salt in an amount sufficient to reduce tobacco smoke.