Make Your Own Cigarettes: Characteristics of the Product and the Consumer
Introduction: Despite a worldwide increase in the use of Make Your Own (MYO) cigarettes, there is little research characterizing MYO smokers in the United States and the cigarettes they make. Methods: In a single laboratory visit, exclusive MYO smokers brought 5 MYO cigarettes they prepared at home, completed demographic and smoking history questionnaires, and prepared 25 cigarettes using their own tobacco and materials. Results: Participants were mostly male (86.7%), average age of 41.3 years, and smoked an average of 19.5 (SD = 7.9) MYO cigarettes per day. They produced two types of cigarettes-by rolling tobacco in a paper leaf (Roll Your Own [RYO, n = 56]) and by injecting tobacco into a tube (Personal Machine Made [PMM, n = 42]). The PMM cigarettes were significantly larger than RYO cigarettes (p < .001). Home- (0.97 g) and laboratory-produced (0.95 g) PMM cigarettes did not differ by weight; however, the RYO cigarettes made at home (0.45 g) were slightly, but significantly, larger than those produced in the laboratory [0.43 g (p < .05)]. There was significant internal consistency in the weight of RYO and PMM cigarettes (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.82, 0.84, respectively). Time to produce RYO cigarettes (53 s/cigarette) was significantly longer than that of PMM cigarettes (42 s/cigarette) (p < .01). Conclusions: By using commercially available tobacco, tubes, and paper, experienced MYO smokers can quickly and consistently prepare cigarettes that may be useful in laboratory smoking topography and exposure experiments. Increasing the regulation of Factory Made (FM) cigarettes may lead to increased use of MYO cigarettes with unknown toxicant exposure and health risks to their consumers.
© The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.
All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: email@example.com
Make Your Own Cigarettes: Characteristics of the Product
and the Consumer
Zachary R.Rosenberry BS1, Andrew A.Strasser PhD2, Lauren L.Canlas BS1, Jennifer L.Potts MA1,
Wallace B.Pickworth PhD1
1 Battelle Center for Analytics and Public Health, Baltimore, MD; 2 Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Nicotine Addiction,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
Corresponding Author: Wallace B.Pickworth, Ph.D., Battelle Center for Analytics and Public Health, 6115 Falls Rd, Suite 200,
Baltimore, MD 21209, USA. Telephone: 410-372-2706; Fax: 410-377-6802; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received August 9, 2012; accepted November 14, 2012
Introduction: Despite a worldwide increase in the use of Make Your Own (MYO) cigarettes, there is little research character-
izing MYO smokers in the United States and the cigarettes they make.
Methods: In a single laboratory visit, exclusive MYO smokers brought 5 MYO cigarettes they prepared at home, completed
demographic and smoking history questionnaires, and prepared 25 cigarettes using their own tobacco and materials.
Results: Participants were mostly male (86.7%), average age of 41.3years, and smoked an average of 19.5 (SD = 7.9) MYO
cigarettes per day. They produced two types of cigarettes—by rolling tobacco in a paper leaf (Roll Your Own [RYO, n = 56])
and by injecting tobacco into a tube (Personal Machine Made [PMM, n = 42]). The PMM cigarettes were significantly larger
than RYO cigarettes (p < .001). Home- (0.97 g) and laboratory-produced (0.95 g) PMM cigarettes did not differ by weight;
however, the RYO cigarettes made at home (0.45 g) were slightly, but significantly, larger than those produced in the laboratory
[0.43 g (p< .05)]. There was significant internal consistency in the weight of RYO and PMM cigarettes (intraclasscorrelation
coefficient = 0.82, 0.84, respectively). Time to produce RYO cigarettes (53 s/cigarette) was significantly longer than that of
PMM cigarettes (42 s/cigarette) (p < .01).
Conclusions: By using commercially available tobacco, tubes, and paper, experienced MYO smokers can quickly and consist-
ently prepare cigarettes that may be useful in laboratory smoking topography and exposure experiments. Increasing the regula-
tion of Factory Made (FM) cigarettes may lead to increased use of MYO cigarettes with unknown toxicant exposure and health
risks to their consumers.
With the implementation of tobacco control policies and
increased price and taxation of cigarettes both domestically
and internationally, the use of Make Your Own (MYO) ciga-
rettes is significant and may be increasing (Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention [CDC], 2012; Hanewinkel, Radden,
& Rosenkranz, 2008; Kengganpanich, Termsirikulchai, &
Benjakul, 2009; Kraft, Svendsen, & Hauknes, 1998; Oddoux &
Melihan-Cheinin, 2001; Young etal., 2012). In the International
Tobacco Control Four Country Survey (ITC-4) of tobacco use,
the prevalence of MYO cigarette smoking was reported as fol-
lows: United Kingdom (28.4%), Canada (17.1%), Australia
(24.2%) (Young et al., 2006), Malaysia (17%), and Thailand
(58%) (Young etal., 2008). Recently, a substantial prevalence
(24.2%) of RYO smoking among Canadian youth smokers
was reported by Leatherdale and Burkhalter (2012). The U.S.
prevalence was reported as 6.7% (Young etal., 2006); however,
reports in trade journals (Williams, 2007) and the popular press
(Weichselbaum, 2012) suggest that current use may be even
greater in the United States.
In other countries, MYO smokers were generally lower
income, male, younger, and had higher levels of nicotine
addiction compared with conventional, Factory Made (FM)
cigarette smokers (Young et al., 2006). Most MYO smokers
cited reduced cost as a reason for their choice (Nosa et al.,
2011) although some believe that MYO cigarettes are safer
than conventional cigarettes (Nosa etal., 2011; Young, Wilson,
Borland, Edwards, & Weerasekera, 2010) or that MYO
cigarettes would help them quit smoking. Published research
has examined MYO users, cigarettes, and smoking topography
outside the United States (Darrall & Figgins, 1998; Kaiserman
& Rickert, 1992a, 1992b; Laugesen, Epton, Frampton, Glover,
& Lea, 2009; Leatherdale & Burkhalter, 2012; Lewis, Truman,
Hosking, & Miller, 2012; Li, Grigg, Weerasekera, & Yeh,
2010; Raisamo, 2011; Shahab, West, & McNeill, 2008, 2009).
In this report, we examined the production of MYO ciga-
rettes and the characteristics of those that made them in a
Advance Access publication January 7, 2013
Nicotine & Tobacco Research, Volume 15, Number 8 (August 2013) 1453–1457
Make your own cigarettes
convenience sample of U.S. urban MYO smokers. This study
has theoretical, practical, and policy implications for U.S.
tobacco control efforts. The use of MYO cigarettes may have
the unintended consequences of sustained tobacco use and
unknown health effects. The Family Smoking Prevention and
Tobacco Control Act (U.S. Congress, 2009) specifically places
MYO tobacco among the products subject to the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) regulation; to date, there have been no
FDA control efforts specifically directed at MYO cigarettes.
For example, there are no health warnings (of the type required
on FM cigarette packages) on the loose tobacco, papers, tubes,
or machines used to prepare MYO cigarettes; because the ciga-
rettes are self-made, there is no control over flavoring addi-
tives that a user may add. Although the use of MYO cigarettes
was cited as a cost-conserving measure (Choi, Hennrikus,
Forster, & St. Claire, 2012), smokers may switch to even lower
priced products by engaging in the practice of utilizing pipe
tobacco—taxed at a lower rate than loose tobacco—to prepare
their cigarettes (CDC, 2012). In addition to the policy impli-
cations from FM regulation on MYO use, there are practical
considerations as well. The practical health consequences of
MYO smoking are uncertain but compared with FM cigarettes
machine smoking studies (Darrall & Figgins, 1998; de Kok,
Besamusca, Vreeker,& Lagrand, 1993; Kaiserman & Rickert,
1992a, 1992b; Rickert, Robinson, Bray, Rogers, & Collishaw,
1985) consistently indicate higher delivery of tar and nicotine
from mainstream MYO smoke. Consistent with these findings,
an epidemiological study suggested an elevated risk of lung
cancer (Engeland, Haldorsen, Andersen, & Tretli, 1996) in
MYO smokers. Tobacco control policy exerted on FM ciga-
rettes may result in the unintended consequence of increasing
the use of potentially more harmful alternatives such as MYO
Participants were adult MYO smokers (N = 98) from the
Baltimore, MD, metropolitan area who reported smoking
MYO cigarettes >80% of all cigarettes smoked. Participants
responded to local newspapers (21%), direct mailers (12%), or
Craigslist (6%) were referred by other participants (59%). Data
collection occurred between April 2010 and November 2011 at
Battelle’s Human Exposure Assessment Laboratory.
At their single laboratory visit, participants provided five
MYO cigarettes that they had prepared at home, signed an
IRB-approved informed consent document and completed
demographic and smoking history questionnaires. Participants
prepared 25 MYO cigarettes in the laboratory using their own
tobacco and paper (or tubes and PMM machines). They pre-
pared 10 cigarettes, took a 15-min break, and then prepared 15
cigarettes. The rate of production of the laboratory cigarettes
was determined using a laboratory timer. During the 15-min
break, a questionnaire assessing reasons for smoking MYO
cigarettes and risk perception of MYO smoking was admin-
istered. Cigarette weights were recorded to the nearest mg.
Participants received $75 for completion of the study.
Cigarette weights and production time were characterized
using descriptive statistics; analysis of variance and chi-square
tests were used to assess group level differences. To assess
the within-participant consistency of MYO production, intra-
classcorrelation coefficient (ICC) analysis was conducted on
the home- and laboratory-produced cigarettes. Analyses were
conducted using SPSS 19.0.
Two different types of cigarettes were made by the study partic-
ipants: those made by rolling tobacco in a paper leaf (Roll Your
Own [RYO, n = 56]) or those made by injecting tobacco into a
tube (Personal Machine Made [PMM, n = 42]). Demographics
and smoking history characteristics of the study participants
are shown in Table1. The study sample was mostly Caucasian,
who had been smoking FM cigarettes for 18.3years and MYO
cigarettes for 9.5years. Most participants had at least a high
school education and had a yearly income of $35,000 or less.
RYO smokers generally had fewer years of education, had been
smoking self-made cigarettes longer, and were more likely to
use menthol compared with PMM smokers (p < .001). The
PMM group smoked significantly more cigarettes per day than
the RYO smokers (p < .05). Nearly, all participants (91.8%)
began smoking FM cigarettes before switching to MYO
Reasons for Smoking MYO
Reduced price was the reason 89.8% of the sample chose to
make their own cigarettes. Other reasons included a healthier
alternative (20.4%), preferred taste (20.4%), and to reduce
smoking (11.2%). There were no significant differences
between RYO and PMM smokers in their reasons for choos-
ing self-produced cigarettes. No significant gender differences
existed for reasons of smoking MYO cigarettes.
Approximately 28% of the MYO participants believed that
certain types of tobacco are more harmful than others. Among
those participants, most believed FM cigarettes were most
harmful (58.6%) and PMM cigarettes were least harmful
Among the 16 African Americans, 13 smoked menthol
(RYO=11). Significantly more Caucasian RYO smokers used
menthol compared with the Caucasian PMM smokers [21 and
7, respectively (p < .001)].
As many as 15 distinct tobacco brands were used by the
participants; 18 (18.3%) people utilized tobacco labeled as pipe
tobacco opposed to that labeled as rolling tobacco—a practice
that has been noted by Morris and Tyman (2012). The average
weights of the five cigarettes produced at home and the 25
cigarettes produced in the laboratory are shown in Figure1A.
Both home- and laboratory-produced PMM cigarettes were
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
significantly larger than RYO cigarettes (p < .001). RYO
cigarettes produced at home were slightly but significantly
(p< .05) larger with a mean weight of 0.45 g (range: 0.18–
0.94 g) than those RYO produced at the laboratory 0.44 g
(range: 0.18–0.83 g). ICC values reflecting the within individual
consistency of RYO cigarette weight was high (0.82).
PMM cigarettes produced at home had a mean weight
of 0.97g (range: 0.53–1.30 g); laboratory-produced PMM
cigarettes had a mean weight of 0.95 g (range: 0.60–1.32 g). As
with the RYO cigarettes, ICC values reflecting the within indi-
vidual consistency of PMM cigarette weight were high (0.84).
As illustrated in Figure 1B, PMM cigarettes took signifi-
cantly (p< .01) less time to produce than RYO cigarettes
Table 1. Demographics and Smoking Characteristics of RYO and PMM Cigarette Smokers
MYO (N = 98) RYO (n = 56) PMM (n = 42)
% % %
Male 86.7 87.5 85.7
Female 13.3 12.5 14.3
Caucasian 75.5 64.3 90.5
African American 16.3 25.0 4.8
Other 8.2 10.7 4.7
Less than high school 14.3 19.6 7.1
High school grade/GED 48.0 55.4 38.1
More than high school 37.7 25.0 54.8
<$20,000 61.2 67.9 52.4
$20,001–$35,000 20.4 19.6 21.4
>$35,000 18.4 12.5 26.2
Menthol Smoking *** 45.9 64.3 21.4
MYO cigarettes per day*
Mean (SD) 19.5 (7.9) 17.9 (6.0) 21.5 (9.5)
Age in years
Mean (SD) 41.3 (12.8) 40.7 (12.7) 42.1 (13.1)
Years smoked FM
Mean (SD) 18.3 (11.8) 17.0 (10.9) 20.0 (13.0)
Years smoked MYO**
Mean (SD) 9.5 (10.4) 13.3 (11.8) 4.4 (4.4)
Notes. MYO, Make Your Own; RYO, Roll Your Own; FM, Factory Made; PMM, Personal Machine Made. Comparisons were made
between RYO and PMM groups. Percentages are provided for categorical variables; means and SDs are provided for continuous
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Figure1. Average (SD) weights of Roll Your Own (RYO, n = 56) and Personal Machine Made (PMM, n = 42) cigarettes at
home (5 cigarettes) and in the laboratory (25 cigarettes), and time to produce RYO and PMM cigarettes in the laboratory. *RYO
cigarettes made at home were significantly larger than those made in the laboratory (p < .05); PMM cigarettes were significantly
larger (p < .001) than RYO cigarettes. †PMM cigarettes take significantly less time to produce than RYO cigarettes (p < .01).
Make your own cigarettes
(42 s/cigarette [range: 10–83 s/cigarette] and 53 s/cigarette
[range: 25–93s/cigarette], respectively).
This study describes the production of MYO cigarettes in a
convenience sample of MYO smokers in a U.S. metropolitan
area (Baltimore, MD). Two distinct types of self-made ciga-
rettes were evident: RYO and PMM. In both groups, the partic-
ipants were usually Caucasian, male, lower income, and chose
to make their own cigarettes because of price considerations.
There were also interesting and significant differences
between RYO and PMM smokers. For example, the average
RYO smoker had been smoking RYO cigarettes for 13.3years,
whereas the PMM smokers had been smoking PMM cigarettes
for only 4.4 years. As expected, menthol smoking predomi-
nated among African Americans in our sample and in the gen-
eral population (Giovino etal., 2004). However, the prevalence
of menthol smoking among Caucasian RYO smokers (58.3%)
in this study differed greatly from that seen in the general pop-
ulation (approximately 20%) (Giovino etal., 2004). The unex-
pectedly high prevalence of menthol among poor Caucasians
and African Americans tentatively suggests that menthol ciga-
rette smoking may be more associated with low socioeconomic
status than race among MYO smokers. The price concerns as a
reason for choosing MYO cigarettes suggests that prevalence
of MYO smoking in the United States and elsewhere may con-
tinue to rise with increasing FM cigarette prices and as eco-
nomic and employment struggles continue.
Some differences were seen in the characteristics of the
MYO products in this study compared with others published
in the literature. RYO cigarettes from the United Kingdom
contained more tobacco (0.51 g) and were more likely to
include a filter (65.5%) than the cigarettes in this study (7.1%)
(Shahab etal., 2008). However, the weight of tobacco in PMM
cigarettes reported in this sample is similar to FM weights
reported in the United States and abroad (Laugesen etal., 2009;
O’Connor, Wilkins, Caruso, Cummings, & Kozlowski, 2010;
Shahab etal., 2009).
The similarity in weight between cigarettes made at home
and in the laboratory has important implications for research on
MYO smoking. There were concerns that cigarettes produced
in the laboratory may be smaller than those produced at home
and therefore affect results of use patterns and toxicant expo-
sures when laboratory-produced cigarettes were used in exper-
imental smoking studies. The demonstration that cigarettes
produced in the laboratory are very similar to those produced at
home indicates that home- and laboratory-produced cigarettes
are acceptable for research studies on smoking behavior and
toxicant exposure (Darrall & Figgins, 1998; Laugesen etal.,
2009; Shahab etal., 2008).
Lower costs were cited by nearly all of the participants as
a reason for choosing MYO over FM cigarettes although par-
ticipants were not specifically asked if price was the reason
they began using MYO cigarettes. Currently, the price of loose
tobacco varies from approximately $5/oz for popular commer-
cial brands (e.g., Top) to about $8/oz for premium brands (e.g.,
American Spirit). Tubes for the PMM cigarettes cost approxi-
mately $3 for a carton of 200, whereas the rolling paper leaves
cost about $2 for a pack of 100. Thus, RYO cigarettes can be
made for as low as $1.70/pack (of 20) and PMM cigarettes can
be made for about $3.00/pack. Those estimates do not include
the price of the PMM injector which varies between $7 (for
an inexpensive handheld) to over $50 (for table models and
electric injectors). The average cost of a pack of FM ciga-
rettes in the United States is $5.29 (Guilfoyle, 2012) but can
cost up to $13.50 for common brands (e.g., Newport) in some
states (Weichselbaum, 2012). Changes in U.S. tax policy in
2011 substantially increased the tax on RYO loose tobacco but
did not significantly increase tax on loose tobacco labeled as
pipe tobacco causing a $21.95/lb tax disparity. Between 2000
and 2011, pipe tobacco sales increased by 482.1% and loose
tobacco labeled as RYO decreased by 56.3% (CDC, 2012).
It is possible for MYO smokers to roll cigarettes of different
size in response to the amount of tobacco they have, the time
they have to smoke, and their desire to smoke. The flexibility in
the production of MYO cigarettes offers MYO users an oppor-
tunity to adaptively change the size of the cigarette to respond
to economic circumstances, as others have observed (Morris
& Tyman, 2012). In our study, there was a small (r = .21) but
significant (p < .05) correlation between reported income and
weight of home-produced cigarettes. Recently, the use of RYO
cigarettes was recognized as a price-minimizing strategy in
about 9% of smokers (Choi etal., 2012).
Although the data in this study are derived from a single
urban area, they are nevertheless the first to look at U.S. MYO
smokers and the types of cigarettes they quickly and consist-
ently produce. Laboratory-prepared MYO cigarettes were
sufficiently similar to home-produced cigarettes which can
be useful in future smoking topography and exposure experi-
ments. This research is needed to understand the comparative
toxicant exposure between MYO and FM cigarettes as price
and regulatory disparities between MYO and FM cigarettes
have resulted in increasing use of MYO cigarettes—products
with unknown and potentially greater health consequences.
This work was supported by a grant from by the National
Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
The authors report no competing interests.
The authors thank Sharean McDonald, Julie Gibbons, and Kim
Hayman for their role in participant recruitment and data col-
lection for this study. Our thanks to Dr. Lacy Fabian for her
critical comments on an early draft of this paper.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2012).
Consumption of cigarettes and combustible tobacco –
United States, 2000–2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 61, 565–569. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6130a1.htm. Last accessed
December 11, 2012.
Choi, K., Hennrikus, D., Forster, J., & St. Claire, A. W.
(2012). Use of price-minimizing strategies by smokers and
their effects on subsequent smoking behaviors. Nicotine &
Tobacco Research, 14, 864–870. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntr300
Darrall, K. G., & Figgins, J. A. (1998). Roll-your-own smoke
yields: Theoretical and practical aspects. Tobacco Control, 7,
de Kok, A., Besamusca, E. W., Vreeker, C. P., & Lagrand, E.
(1993). Roll-your-own: A delicate subject. A study of the
tar and nicotine content of the 42 roll your own brands
sold in the Netherlands. Report AL TAB-1992-1. Alkmaar,
Netherlands: Inspectie Gezondheidsbescherming, 1993.
Engeland, A., Haldorsen, T., Andersen, A., & Tretli, S. (1996).
The impact of smoking habits on lung cancer risk. I: 28years’
observation of 26,000 Norweigian men and women. Cancer
Causes Control, 7, 366–376. doi:10.1007/BF00052943
Giovino, G. A., Sidney, S., Gfroerer, J. C., O’Malley, P. M.,
Allen, J. A., Richter, P. A., . . . Cummings, K.M. (2004).
Epidemiology of menthol cigarette use. Nicotine & Tobacco
Research, 6, S67–S81. doi:10.1080/14622203710001649696
Guilfoyle, J. (2012). Toll of tobacco in the United States of
America. Retrieved from http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/
research/factsheets/pdf/0072.pdf Last accessed December
Hanewinkel, R., Radden, C., & Rosenkranz, T. (2008). Price
increase causes fewer sales of factory-made cigarettes and
higher sales of cheaper loose tobacco in Germany. Health
Economics, 17, 683–693. doi:10.1002/hec.1282
Kaiserman, M. J., & Rickert, W. S. (1992a). Carcinogens in
tobacco smoke: Benzo[a]pyrene from Canadian cigarettes
and cigarette tobacco. American Journal of Public Health,
82, 1023–1026. doi:10.2105/AJPH.82.7.1023
Kaiserman, M. J., & Rickert, W. S. (1992b). Handmade ciga-
rettes: It’s the tube that counts. American Journal of Public
Health, 82, 107–107. doi:10.2105/AJPH.82.1.107
Kengganpanich, M., Termsirikulchai, L., & Benjakul, S. (2009).
The impact of cigarette tax increase on smoking behavior
of daily smokers. Journal of the Medical Association of
Thailand=Chotmaihet thangphaet, 92, S46–S53.
Kraft, P., Svendsen, T., & Hauknes, A. (1998). Intention to stop
smoking among Norwegian smokers: The role of nicotine
dependence, type of cigarettes, and age at onset of daily
smoking. Addictive Behaviors, 23, 133–137.
Laugesen, M., Epton, M., Frampton, C. M., Glover, M., &
Lea, R. A. (2009). Hand-rolled cigarette smoking patterns
compared with factory-made cigarette smoking in New
Zealand men. BMC Public Health, 9, 194. doi:10.1186/
Leatherdale, S. T., & Burkhalter, R. (2012). Roll-your-own
tobacco use among Canadian youth: Is it a bigger problem than
we think? BMC Public Health, 12. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-
Lewis, A. J., Truman, P., Hosking, M. R., & Miller, J. H.
(2012). Monoamine oxidase inhibitory activity in tobacco
smoke varies with tobacco type. Tobacco Control, 21, 39–
Li, J., Grigg, M., Weerasekera, D., & Yeh, L. C. (2010).
Characteristics and quitting success of roll-your-own ver-
sus tailor-made cigarette smokers. New Zealand Medical
Journal, 123, 64–73.
Morris, D. S., & Tyman, M. A. (2012). Fiscal and policy impli-
cations of selling pipe tobacco for roll-your-own cigarettes
in the United States. PLoS One, 7, e36487. doi:10.1371/jour-
Nosa, V., Glover, M., Min, S., Scragg, R., Bullen, C., McCool,
J., . . . Kira, A. (2011). The use of the ‘rollie’ in New
Zealand: preference for loose tobacco among an ethnically
diverse low socioeconomic urban population. New Zealand
Medical Journal, 124, 25–33.
O’Connor, R. J., Wilkins, K. J., Caruso, R. V., Cummings, K.
M., & Kozlowski, L. T. (2010). Cigarette characteristic and
emission variations across high-, middle- and low-income
countries. Public Health, 124, 667–74. doi:10.1016/j.
Oddoux, K., & Melihan-Cheinin, P. (2001). France: Rolling
round the curbs. Tobacco Control, 10, 6.
Raisamo, S. U. (2011). Trends in roll-your-own tobacco use
among adolescents in Finland, 1981–2009. Preventive
Medicine, 53, 431–432. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.09.004
Rickert, W. S., Robinson, J. C., Bray, D. F., Rogers, B., &
Collishaw, N. E. (1985). Characterization of tobacco prod-
ucts: Acomparative study of the tar, nicotine, and carbon
monoxide yields of cigars, manufactured cigarettes, and
cigarettes made from ne-cut tobacco. Preventive Medicine,
14, 226–233. doi:10.1016/0091-7435(85)90038-6
Shahab, L., West, R., & McNeill, A. (2008). The feasibil-
ity of measuring pufng behaviour in roll-your-own ciga-
rette smokers. Tobacco Control, 17, i17–i23. doi:10.1136/
Shahab, L., West, R., & McNeill, A. (2009). A comparison of
exposure to carcinogens among roll-your-own and factory-
made cigarette smokers. Addiction Biology, 14, 315–320.
U.S. Congress. (2009). 111th Congress, 1st Session. HR 1256,
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (intro-
duced March 3, 2009); Public Law 111–31. Available from
http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS115615 Last accessed
December 11, 2012.
Weichselbaum, S. (2012, July 01). Brooklyn, S.I. tobacco
shops defy federal order to stop selling untaxed smokes.
NY Daily News. Retrieved from http://articles.nydailynews.
stores-shop-owners. Last accessed December 11, 2012.
Williams, D. (2007). Small market, big impact. Tobacco
Young, D., Borland, R., Hammond, D., Cummings, K. M.,
Devlin, E., Yong, H. H., . . . ITC Collaboration. (2006).
Prevalence and attributes of roll-your-own smokers in the
International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey.
Tobacco Control, 15, iii76–iii82. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.013268
Young, D., Wilson, N., Borland, R., Edwards, R., &
Weerasekera, D. (2010). Prevalence, correlates of, and
reasons for using roll-your-own tobacco in a high RYO
use country: Findings from the ITC New Zealand survey.
Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 12, 1089–1098. doi:10.1093/
Young, D., Yong, H. H., Borland, R., Ross, H., Sirirassamee, B.,
Kin, F.,...Fong, G.T. (2008). Prevalence and correlates of
roll-your-own smoking in Thailand and Malaysia: Findings
of the ITC-South East Asia Survey. Nicotine & Tobacco
Research, 10, 907–915. doi:10.1080/14622200802027172
Young, D., Yong H. H., Borland, R., Shahab, L., Hammond,
D., Cummings, K. M. etal....Wilson, N. (2012). Trends in
roll-your-own smoking: Findings from the ITC Four-Country
Survey (2002–2008). Journal of Environmental and Public
Health 2012; 2012: 406283. doi:10.1155/2012/406283