Re: talk to me about tonquin.
Post by Rusty » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:12 pm
It's interesting to look at the language SG uses in describing 1792, "Dark-fired leaf hot pressed and cut into a 6" flake before adding a dressing of Tonquin flavour. A full strength, full flavoured tobacco." That suggests that it is like Tonquin but not necessarily the extract from the Tonka bean. There are alternative synthetic compounds that do not contain coumarin but do have the same flavour. I checked the distributor (Kohlhase Kopp) in Germany, where 1792 would be prohibited from sales if it contained Coumarin/was extract from Tonka bean, and they just say that it's aromatic and do not mention Tonquin flavour at all. Chickens. The tobacco industry is well aware of other equivalent alternatives that pose a lot less product liability risk and are not prohibited in tobacco in countries that do prohibit coumarin eg Germany. This exactly what BAT did with the Export Imperial tobacco set and everyone was being shipped the same version. Nothing indicates that they made different versions for different markets. They modified the flavourings and that remained the case when they were manufacturing outsourced to STG in Denmark. Domestic UK production from Imperial tobacco themselves certainly did still contain Coumarin in the 70's and we know this because BAT was using their flavourings on the export set until the project to devise new ones compliant with Germany's new law. This is two distinct manufacturers that have different markets. With a single manufacturer they would likely adopt the most stringent rules for one flavouring for all markets. So I suspect that SG likely replaced the Tonka bean extract with an equivalent that isn't prohibited. There are no obvious reasons why they would have different versions for different markets. That would increase risk of violation. And AFAIK nobody has ever commented about differences in 1792 based upon markets. I would guess that places that regulate content have likely eliminated Tonka bean extract and coumarin because it's prohibited in most of the markets except the US & UK. It's much easier to use an acceptable substitute and not take an unwarranted risk. Deerstongue is something else again.
We'll have to wait and see what the FDA decides when they're faced with some US manufacturers still using deertongue. We'll also get to see whether any imports test as having coumarin. In their testing the FDA found coumarin in cig tobaccos despite an agreement not to use it with the manufacturers. So who knows? :D
** Update: I checked the Legacy Tob documents library to see how many blends in the past used either Deertongue or Tonka Bean extract for flavouring. It's amazing how many there were eg Sail, Erinmore, some of the Dunhill blends, many of the Imperial Tob blends, etc. It was quite widespread. Now it seems that most of them cannot use it anymore because of strict additive limitations adopted by some countries where PT sales are significant. So if the product has broad distribution ie through Europe, Canada Australia then I think it's very likely that a substitute that contains virtually no Coumarin is now in use. This whole issue blew up in the 70's & 80's in South America and Europe. For the Big tobacco companies to maintain product distribution they would have to substitute an alternative for flavouring. So, except for some blends in the US (not widely distrib.), it's very likely mostly gone, replaced with alternate toppings.
http://christianpipesmokers.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=37222