Fire-safe Cigarettes Research Articles

The impact of state fire safe cigarette policies on fire fatalities, injuries, and incidents.

Cigarettes are a leading cause of civilian deaths in home fires. Over the last decade, state fire service leaders and allied interest groups succeeded in persuading state lawmakers to require manufacturers to sell only low-ignition strength or "fire safe" cigarettes as a strategy to reduce these fatalities and the injuries and losses that stem from them. This article examines whether the states' fire safe cigarette laws actually helped to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce the incidence of home fires ignited by cigarettes left unattended by smokers. Controlling for the effects of key demographic, social, economic, and housing variables, this study finds that the states' fire-safe cigarette policies had significant impacts on reducing the rate of smoking-related civilian fire deaths and the incidence of fires started by tobacco products. The findings also suggest that the states' fire safe cigarette policies may have helped to reduce the rate of smoking-related fire injuries. The study shows that collective actions by leaders in the fire service across the states can result in meaningful policy change that protects lives and advances public safety even when a political consensus for action is absent at the national level.

Are fire safe cigarettes actually fire safe? Evidence from changes in US state laws

ObjectiveTo estimate the effects of fire safe cigarette laws on fire mortality and cigarette-related fires in the USA.MethodsWe examined the gradual implementation of the laws to identify their average effects,...

Multicenter assessment of burn team injury prevention knowledge.

Engaging burn professionals to utilize "teachable moments" and provide accurate fire safety and burn prevention (FSBP) education is essential in reducing injury incidence. Minimal data is available regarding burn clinicians' evidence-based FSBP knowledge. A committee of prevention professionals developed, pilot-tested, and distributed a 52-question online survey assessing six major categories: demographical information (n = 7); FSBP knowledge (n = 24); home FSBP practices (n = 6); burn center FSBP education (n = 7); self-assessed competence and confidence in providing FSBP education (n = 2); and improving ABA reach (n = 6). Responses with <50% completion of FSBP knowledge section were excluded. Total group's (TG) mean FSBP score of 61.5% was used to define and compare underperformers (UP). After excluding 36 incomplete responses, test scores ranged: TG (n = 427) 21-88% and UP (n = 183) 21-58%. Ten FSBP knowledge questions covering seven topics were incorrectly answered by >50% of TG. ANOVA showed self-reported competence and confidence in providing FSBP education were not good predictors of FSBP scores, but staff with <2 years experience scored lower. Over 90% of TG wants FSBP fact sheets for patient education. Burn professionals have a responsibility to educate patients, families, and communities on FSBP. Team members report competence and confidence in their ability to provide FSBP education. However, this multicenter survey demonstrates the need for professional training on best practices in injury prevention, specifically targeting knowledge gaps on: smoke alarms, fire-safe cigarettes, children's sleepwear, burn/fire epidemiology, fireworks, bathing/scald injuries, and residential sprinklers. Based on these findings, FSBP educational materials will be created.

Association between fire-safe cigarette legislation and residential fire deaths in the United States.

BackgroundCigarettes and other tobacco-related smoking products have traditionally been a major ignition source for residential fire deaths. In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws requiring that cigarettes self-extinguish if they are not being smoked (so-called fire-safe cigarette laws). The purpose of this study was to quantify the association between state-level implementation of fire-safe cigarette legislation and the rate of residential fire death.MethodsPoisson regression was used to analyze state-years data. Main intervention: Implementation dates for fire-safe cigarette legislation in each state. Outcome: Residential fire mortality rate.ResultsImplementation of fire-safe cigarette legislation was associated with a 19% reduction in overall residential fire mortality rates, adjusted for demographic differences between states (rate ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.79, 0.84). This is approximately similar to the estimated proportion of residential fire deaths in which smoking materials are an ignition source (23%). Legislation implementation was associated with a protective effect for every age, sex, race, and ethnicity strata that we examined. State-specific residential fire mortality death rates decreased (defined as a drop of at least 5%) in 32 states after fire-safe cigarette legislation was implemented. In 12 states there was either less than a 5% decrease or an increase, and seven states had insufficient deaths to evaluate state-level changes.ConclusionsImplementation of fire-safe cigarette is associated with reductions in residential fire mortality rates.

Association between fire-safe cigarette legislation and residential fire deaths in the United States

Association between fire-safe cigarette legislation and residential fire deaths in the United States

Effectiveness of the Cigarette Ignition Propensity Standard in Preventing Unintentional Residential Fires in Massachusetts

We evaluated the Massachusetts Fire Safe Cigarette Law's (FSCL's) effectiveness in preventing residential fires. We examined unintentional residential fires reported to the Massachusetts Fire Incident Reporting System from 2004 to 2010. We analyzed FSCL effect on the likelihood of cigarette- versus noncigarette-caused fires and effect modification by fire scenario factors by using an interrupted time series regression model. We analyzed the effect of FSCL on monthly fire rates with Poisson regression. Cigarettes caused 1629 unintentional residential fires during the study period. The FSCL was associated with a 28% (95% confidence interval = 12%, 41%) reduction in the odds of cigarette- versus noncigarette-caused fires, although not in analyses restricted to casualty fires, with smaller sample size. The largest reductions were among fires in which human factors were involved; that were first ignited on furniture, bedding, or soft goods; that occurred in living areas; or that occurred in the summer or winter. The FSCL appears to have decreased the likelihood of cigarette-caused residential fires, particularly in scenarios for which the ignition propensity standard was developed. Current standards should be adopted, and the need for strengthening should be considered.

Halogenated Flame Retardants: Do the Fire Safety Benefits Justify the Risks?

Since the 1970s, an increasing number of regulations have expanded the use of brominated and chlorinated flame retardants. Many of these chemicals are now recognized as global contaminants and are associated with adverse health effects in animals and humans, including endocrine and thyroid disruption, immunotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, cancer, and adverse effects on fetal and child development and neurologic function. Some flame retardants such as polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) have been banned or voluntarily phased out by manufacturers because of their environmental persistence and toxicity, only to be replaced by other organohalogens of unknown toxicity. Despite restrictions on further production in some countries, consumer products previously treated with banned retardants are still in use and continue to release toxic chemicals into the environment, and the worldwide use of organohalogen retardants continues to increase. This paper examines major uses and known toxic effects of commonly-used organohalogen flame retardants, replacements for those that have been phased out, their combustion by-products, and their effectiveness at reducing fire hazard. Policy and other solutions to maintain fire safety while reducing toxicity are suggested. The major conclusions are: (1) Flammability regulations can cause greater adverse environmental and health impacts than fire safety benefits. (2) The current options for end-of-life disposal of products treated with organohalogens retardants are problematic. (3) Life-cycle analyses evaluating benefits and risks should consider the health and environmental effects of the chemicals, as well as their fire safety impacts. (4) Most fire deaths and most fire injuries result from inhaling carbon monoxide, irritant gases, and soot. The incorporation of organohalogens can increase the yield of these toxic by-products during combustion. (5) Fire-safe cigarettes, fire-safe candles, child-resistant lighters, sprinklers, and smoke detectors can prevent fires without the potential adverse effects of flame retardant chemicals. (6) Alternatives to organohalogen flame retardant chemicals include using less flammable materials, design changes, and safer chemicals. To date, before evaluating their health and environmental impacts, many flame retardant chemicals have been produced and used, resulting in high levels of human exposure. As a growing literature continues to find adverse impacts from such chemicals, a more systematic approach to their regulation is needed. Before implementing new flammability standards, decision-makers should evaluate the potential fire safety benefit versus the health and environmental impacts of the chemicals, materials, or technologies likely to be used to meet the standard. Reducing the use of toxic or untested flame retardant chemicals in consumer products can protect human and animal health and the global environment without compromising fire safety.

Regulating Cigarettes for Fire Safety

Cigarettes are the leading cause of residential fire fatalities in the United States, resulting in 700 to 900 deaths per year. Annual property damage is approximately $400 million, and the total annual economic loss is estimated to be nearly $4 billion including health care, lost productivity and pain and suffering. Despite these costs, cigarette manufacturers have not significantly reduced the ignition propensity of their products even after conducting extensive research into the matter. In response, several states have mandated reduced ignition performance standards for cigarettes. Section I of this article reviews the immense public harm resulting from cigarette-caused fires. Section II examines the regulatory structure, feasibility, compliance and implementation of fire safe cigarette legislation in the United States. Section III discusses litigation involving cigarette-caused fires. Section IV examines industry rhetoric and its stance against voluntarily and comprehensively reducing the ignition propensity of cigarettes. Section IV highlights current policy concerns and the movement towards a national standard through either state or national legislation.

Researching State Tobacco Policymaking: Issues, Data Sources, and Methods

AbstractIn recent years, scholars of applied public policy have published a growing number of studies regarding state tobacco policymaking. This article analyzes the research findings, data sources, and methodological approaches of this applied and theoretical policy research, including numerous comprehensive state tobacco policymaking studies analyzing issues such as youth access enforcement, tobacco taxes, anti-tobacco education efforts, and clean indoor air programs. Other studies have focused on individual policymaking instruments designed to address state tobacco control issues, including tort reform, tobacco listed as a cause of death on death certificates, tobacco sampling, promotion and advertising restrictions, and fire-safe cigarettes. This wealth of research into tobacco policymaking has contributed significantly to our understanding of federalism, policy diffusion, and iron triangles and issue networks.

From strange bedfellows to natural allies: the shifting allegiance of fire service organisations in the push for federal fire-safe cigarette legislation

Background: Cigarettes are the leading cause of fatal fires in the USA and are associated with one in four fire deaths. Although the technology needed to make fire-safe cigarettes has...

The case for fire safe cigarettes made through industry documents

Objectives: To examine the extensive research undertaken by the tobacco industry over the past 25 years toward development of a fire safe cigarette. Methods: Research was conducted through a web...

Lessons Learned from the Fire-Safe Cigarette Campaign

Lessons Learned from the Fire-Safe Cigarette Campaign

Cigarette Ignition Performance

Two sample cigarettes (coded B and D) along with a control were tested according to the two cigarette ignition propensity test methods published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The primary test uses duck fabrics over polyurethane foam in a flat configuration, and the secondary test uses Whatman #2 filter paper. The three cigarettes were also tested on commercial upholstery fabrics in the flat and crevice configurations. Cigarettes B and D used 80 CORESTA cigarette paper with 5.5 mm and 6.5 mm wide bands, respectively. The control used 33 CORESTA paper with no bands. Cigarettes B and D produced significantly less ignitions than the control on duck fabrics and &gt;90% self-extinguishment (SE) compared to 0% SE for the control on 10 layers of filter paper. However, the cigarettes with bands produced significantly more ignitions on duck fabrics #6 and #10 when smoldered horizontally vs. vertically (NIST proposed smoldering position) prior to placing on the mockup. On 25 commercial upholstery fabrics tested in a flat configuration, cigarettes B and D produced 5% fewer ignitions than the control, which was significantly different. However, on 22 commercial upholstery fabrics tested in the crevice configuration, B and D produced 4% or fewer ignitions than the control, which was not a significant difference. No significant differences were obtained in any test between cigarettes B and D, which used different band widths. A self-extinguishing cigarette on an arbitrary set of layered filter papers does not inherently translate to “fire-safe cigarette.”

Cost-outcome analysis in injury prevention and control: eighty-four recent estimates for the United States.

The objectives of this study were to review cost-outcome analyses in injury prevention and control and estimate associated benefit-cost ratios and cost per quality-adjusted life-year. Medline and Internet search, bibliographic review, and federal agency contacts identified published and unpublished studies from 1987 to 1998 for the United States. Studies of low quality and analyses of occupational, air, rail, and water transport safety programs were excluded. Selected results were recomputed to increase discount rate, benefit category, and benefit estimate comparability and to update injury incidence rates. More than half of the 84 injury prevention measures reviewed yielded net societal cost savings. Twelve measures had costs that exceeded benefits. Of 33 road safety measures analyzed, 19 yielded net cost savings. Of 34 violence prevention approaches studied, 19 yielded net cost savings, whereas 8 had costs that exceeded benefits. Interventions with the highest benefit-cost ratios included juvenile delinquent therapy programs, fire-safe cigarettes, federal road and traffic safety program funding, lane markers painted on roads, post-mounted reflectors on hazardous curves, safety belts in front seats, safety belt laws with primary enforcement, child safety seats, child bicycle helmets, enforcement of laws against serving alcohol to the intoxicated, substance abuse treatment, brief medical interventions with heavy drinkers, and a comprehensive safe communities program in a low-income neighborhood. Studies of cost-saving measures do not exist for several injury types. Injury prevention often can reduce medical costs and save lives. Wider implementation of proven measures is warranted.

The fire-safe cigarette: a burn prevention tool.

Cigarettes are the most common ignition source for fatal house fires, which cause approximately 29% of the fire deaths in the United States. A common scenario is the delayed ignition of a sofa, chair, or mattress by a lit cigarette that is forgotten or dropped by a smoker whose alertness is impaired by alcohol or medication. Cigarettes are designed to continue burning when left unattended. If they are dropped on mattresses, upholstered furniture, or other combustible material while still burning, their propensity to start fires varies depending on the cigarette design and content. The term "fire-safe" has evolved to describe cigarettes designed to have a reduced propensity for igniting mattresses and upholstered furniture. Legislative interest in the development of fire-safe smoking materials has existed for more than 50 years. Studies that showed the technical and economic feasibility of commercial production of fire-safe cigarettes were completed more than 10 years ago. Despite this, commercial production of fire-safe smoking materials has not been undertaken. The current impasse relates to the lack of consensus on a uniform test method on which to base a standard for fire-safe cigarettes. Although the fire-safe cigarette is a potentially important burn prevention tool, commercial production of such cigarettes will not occur until a standard against which fire-starting performance can be measured has been mandated by law at the state or federal level. The burn care community can play a leadership role in such legislative efforts.

The epidemiology of fire-related deaths in Alabama, 1992-1997.

The state of Alabama has one of the highest fire-related fatality rates in the nation. The goal of this study was to present the epidemiology of fire-related deaths in the state of Alabama. Fatality reports for all fire-related deaths in the state of Alabama from 1992 to 1997 were obtained from the State Fire Marshall's Office. Fatality rates were calculated and compared according to age, sex, and race. Descriptive statistics were generated for population and fire characteristics. Fatality rates were higher among black people, men, children, and older people. Approximately half (48.8%) of the deaths occurred between the months of November and March; July had the lowest proportion of deaths (5.0%). Residential fires accounted for the largest proportion of deaths. Fatality rates were higher for mobile home residents. Overall, smoke detectors were present in only 32.5% of the residential fires. The presence of smoke detectors was more common with deaths in urban locations (41.8%) than with deaths in rural locations (20.8%). The most frequently reported cause of fatal fires was misuse of cigarettes. More than half of the victims aged 18 years and older tested positive for alcohol. Fire prevention efforts should focus on smoke detectors, fire-safe cigarettes, and alcohol. Mobile home residents should also be targeted for fire prevention initiatives.

Quantifying the ignition propensity of cigarettes

AbstractResearch funded under the Fire Safe Cigarette Act of 1990 (United States Public Law 101–352) has led to the development of two test methods for measuring the ignition propensity of cigarettes. The Mock‐Up Ignition Test Method uses substrates physically similar to upholstered furniture and mattresses: a layer of fabric over padding. The measure of cigarette performance is ignition or non‐ignition of the substrate. The Cigarette Extinction Test Method replaces the fabric/padding assembly with multiple layers of common filter paper. The measure of perfomance is full‐length burning or self‐extinguishment of the cigarette. Routine measurement of the relative ignition propensity of cigarettes is feasible using either of the two methods. Improved cigarette performance under both methods has been linked with reduced real‐world ignition behavior; and it is reasonable to assume that this, in turn, implies a significant real‐would benefit. Both methods have been subjected to interlaboratory study. The resulting reproducibilities were comparable to each other and comparable to those in other fire test methods currently being used to regulate materials which may be involved in unwanted fires. Using the two methods, some current commercial cigarettes are shown to have reduced ignition propensities relative to the current best‐selling cigarettes.

Progress Towards a Fire-Safe Cigarette

About 1,000 deaths, 3,000 serious injuries, and several billion dollars in costs of property loss, health care and pain and suffering, result each year in the U.S. from fires started by dropped cigarettes. Efforts to prevent these losses have progressed from admonitory slogans to product-flammability standards to addressing the cigarette itself. Two recent federal studies have: a) concluded that it is technically feasible to produce a cigarette with a reduced likelihood of starting fires, and b) published a broadly validated method by which cigarette brands can be tested for this propensity. The long-term effort of scientists, legislators and public health activists to develop and implement a fire-safe cigarette standard also constitutes a legal liability challenge and a threat to the relative and absolute size of the cigarette market shares held by major U.S. tobacco companies.

The Causes, Cost, and Prevention of Childhood Burn Injuries

In 1985, fire and/or burn injuries killed 1461 children aged 0 to 19 years in the United States; an estimated 23,638 children were hospitalized and 440,000 were treated for burns. More than 101,000 life years were lost. A "cost of burn injury" model suggests a dollar value of societal losses from childhood burn deaths and injuries at approximately $3.5 billion. Very young children (0 to 4 years) dying in house fires accounted for 47% of these deaths. Preventing fire deaths through residential sprinklers, smoke detectors, fire-safe cigarettes, and child-resistant lighters would prevent more than three quarters of all childhood fire/burn deaths. While interventions exist for tap water scalds, solutions to the problems of "kitchen" scald and gasoline-involved flame burns are less apparent.

Fleecing the Taxpayer to Develop a Fire-Safe Cigarette

To the Editor.— article entitled The Fire-Safe Cigarette1(an excellent example of an oxymoron) in the July 8, 1988, issue ofJAMAshould receive the Golden Fleece Award from Senator Proxmire. How much of my tax money is going to be spent on research to come up with a fire-safe cigarette when fires caused by cigarettes accounted for only 1500 deaths last year? Cigarettes now carry a warning that they may cause cancer of the lung and may complicate pregnancy. American Cancer Society and the American Lung Association tell me that 136 000 Americans died of lung cancer last year. Is it really true that we are going to spend a lot of research money to determine how to make a cigarette safe to save 1500 people a year from dying and not do anything about the 136 000 that are dying of lung cancer from that