Evidence is an important resource for policy makers. Alongside its practical utility, evidence is a persuasive strategic and rhetorical tool. This study scrutinises the information used by tobacco interests in opposition to Brazil's National Health Surveillance Agency's (ANVISA) 2012 regulations. We analysed one prominent document widely cited in the policy discourse, produced by Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) in 2010 when ANVISA initiated public consultations. The FGV document formed the basis of opposition to the regulations. We conducted four levels of analysis of the FGV document: (1) identifying the main arguments, (2) linking the arguments with evidence, (3) analysing the quality of evidence and (4) a contextual analysis, examining how evidence was interpreted and represented. Three of five arguments were supported by information produced by an external source. Sixty eight percent of evidence sources were supported by the tobacco industry and only 31% were peer-reviewed. Information was often misrepresented in the arguments. Tobacco interests continue to draw from sources they claim are scientific to legitimise their opposition to tobacco regulation. The information from these sources are often misrepresented, used to distract from the health objectives of policy and receive direct or indirect support from the tobacco industry.