Snus Forum Forum Index
Snus Forum - All about Swedish Snus

American Snuff vs. Snus

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Snus Forum Forum Index -> Snus FAQ
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
PITBOSS



Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 2
Local time: 5:51 PM
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: American Snuff vs. Snus

I just got my order of SNUS, the reason I'm trying it is that I read an article that Snus tobacco doesn't have all the carcinogens (or something to that effect) that the American tobaccos do. Any truth in that? If so, i'm giving up my copenhagen for good.
sockwars



Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 59
Local time: 7:51 PM
Location: Cape Town, South Africa

PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:15 pm    Post subject:

I've read that somewhere too... I can't remember where, sorry, would be good to back-up my claims! I think it may have been on the GothiaTek website, try this link.
_________________
Snus of choice: CatchDry Eucalyptus

lofat



Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 14
Local time: 9:51 AM
Location: Hayward, California

PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 6:16 pm    Post subject:

yes, the process used to make snus generates less NTSA's. There is a wealth of info online. Google searches and a search of your online suppliers site should prove usefull.

I switched from cope about almost 2 months ago... the first week was an adjustment, haven't looked back since.

From Wiki....

Quote:
Health consequences

Since snus is not intended nor recommended for inhalation, it does not affect the lungs like cigarettes do, although it does contain more nicotine than cigarettes. Because it is steam-cured, rather than fire-cured like smoking tobacco or other chewing tobacco, it contains lower concentrations of nitrosamines and other carcinogens that form from the partially anaerobic heating of proteins; 2.8 parts per mil for Ettan brand compared to as high as 127.9 parts per mil in American brands, according to a study by the State of Massachusetts Health Department. The World Health Organization (WHO) acknowledges that Swedish men have the lowest rate of lung cancer in Europe, partly due to the low tobacco smoking rate, but does not argue for substituting snus for smoking, citing that the effects of snus still remain unclear. Since the level of carcinogens in snus is not zero, however, it still poses some increased risk for oral cancer, however small. The European Union banned the sale of snus in 1992, after a 1985 WHO study concluded that "oral use of snuffs of the types used in North America and western Europe is carcinogenic to humans", but a WHO committee on tobacco has also acknowledged that evidence is inconclusive regarding health consequences for snus consumers.

Only Sweden and EFTA-member Norway are exempt from the EU ban. A popular movement during the run-up to the 1994 referendum for Sweden's EU membership made the exemption of EU's criminalization of snus a part of the membership treaty.

Recent actions by many European governments to limit the use of cigarettes has led to calls to lift the ban on snus as it is generally considered to be less harmful, both to the user and surroundings, than cigarette smoke.

[edit] Debate among public health researchers

There is some debate among public health researchers over the use of "safer" tobacco or nicotine delivery systems, generally dividing along two lines of thought. Most researchers presently are of the "abstinence" belief, believing that no form of tobacco or nicotine use is acceptable or safe, and should be minimized among the population. A growing minority (primarily in the European Union and Canada) believes in "harm reduction," where the belief is generally that, while it should remain a goal to reduce addiction to nicotine in the population as a whole, the reduction of harm to the health of those who choose to use nicotine should override the need to reduce overall nicotine addiction. For example, some research [2] available today shows that snus use reduces or eliminates the risk of cancers that afflict other users of tobacco products such as "chewing tobacco" (the type primarily used in the United States and Canada, created in a process similar to cigarette tobacco) and cigarettes. It is hypothesized that the widespread use of snus by Swedish men (estimated at 30% of Swedish men, possibly because it is much cheaper than cigarettes), displacing tobacco smoking and other varieties of snuff, is responsible for the incidence of tobacco-related mortality in men being significantly lower in Sweden than any other European country; in contrast, since women are much less likely to use snus, their rate of tobacco-related deaths in Sweden is similar to that in other European countries. There is an increase in the prevalence of hypertension in Snus users, so the health effects are not all positive, however.

Snus is clearly much less harmful than other tobacco products; according to Kenneth Warner, director of the University of Michigan Tobacco Research Network,

"The Swedish government has studied this stuff to death, and to date, there is no compelling evidence that it has any adverse health consequences. ... Whatever they eventually find out, it is dramatically less dangerous than smoking."

Opponents of snus sales maintain that, nevertheless, even the low nitrosamine levels in snus cannot be completely risk free, but snus proponents point out that inasmuch as snus is used as a substitute for smoking or a means to quit smoking, the net overall effect is positive, similar to the effect of nicotine patches, for instance.

In addition, rather obviously, this eliminates any exposure to "second-hand smoke", further reducing possible harm to other non-tobacco users. This is seen by public health advocates who believe in "harm reduction" as a reason for recommending snus in addition to other nicotine replacement therapies rather than continued use of cancer-causing nicotine delivery systems.

This does not, however, eliminate any harm to health caused by the nicotine itself. Current research focuses on possible long-term effects on blood pressure, and possible risk of cancer of the pancreas due to the nicotine delivered by snus usage. Nicotine stimulates the gastrointestinal tract's production of cholecystokinin, which stimulates pancreatic growth and may be implicated in pancreatic cancer; but thus far the evidence specifically implicating snus is only suggestive. [3]

_________________
http://stillstream.com
Greg



Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Posts: 10
Local time: 5:51 PM
Location: Bristol, England, United Kingdom

PostPosted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:45 pm    Post subject:

Yes, I've read all this. Having become intent on stopping smoking after a regular 35 year habit, I tried the nicotine replacement options available in the UK also endorsed by our Health Service. All of them, patches, chewing gum and inhalers were totally inadequate. They all left you doing cold turkey withdrawal. Interestingly, they don't seem to publish what the risks of these therapies are to the user. Could they be as harmful as Snus may be? Wink

In desperation I went on the internet and discovered Snus. It does deal with my craving and keep me straight. It doesn't give me a buzz like a fag does, but I can live with that as overall it is a nice and clean way of getting an adequate supply of nicotine. I love the fact that I no longer smell of smoke and can still absorb nicotine in any work or home situation without detection or effecting others. The health risks seem to be considerably reduced from what smoking does so it may not be best, but it certainly is safer and that is good for me.

Personally, although I doubt our hosts will agree, I'll be happy for Snus to remain a banned substance in the majority of the EU. If it gets legalised I'm sure it'll cost as much as cigarettes in the UK so the government gets their tax. Even with the expected tax increases Sweden are adding, it's still going to be a good deal for a UK resident. Currently, 20 fags in the UK are over 5 (use your currency calculator to work that out Rolling Eyes )

Previously I always tried to buy my smoking tobacco outside of the UK because it was up to 3/4 cheaper. Snus at present is balanced with that; maybe slight more expensive and I'm happy with that.

I suppose giving up nicotine is the ultimate option, but having been diagnosed as having an addictive nature, I'm not too confident that will happen. In the meantime, I'll take my adequate supply of nicotine the safest way I can Very Happy

Best wishes,

Greg
PITBOSS



Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 2
Local time: 5:51 PM
Location: Alabama

PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:25 am    Post subject:

Thanks for the info guys, and Greg congrats on quitting the smoking. I have never been a smoker, just smokeless, for the past 10 years. I actually quit for 3 of those to get my wife off my back. Snus is something that I really enjoy. I'm still on my first can, but I really like it better than the Copenhagen.
Display posts from previous: