E-smoking vs snus

[paladinx]

alot has been said about harm reduction and trying to quit smoking. What do you guys think the gives the most harm reduction. Snus or e-smoking? I am guessing snus is safer since you are not inhaling anything into your lungs, and that it has been around a lot longer. Any ideas or input on this subject?

regards

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

You pretty much know what you're getting from snus.... with the e-cig you have a lot of unknowns (especially considering most people are getting their liquid from unknown places without any kind of safety standards). For this reason, in my opinion at least, snus is the safer of the two for harm reduction. Plus, like you said... inhaling anything into your lungs besides air probably isn't the best thing for you.

[D_Struct]

I would have to go with e-cigs due to the lack of processed tobacco, but I know Tropical Bob has referenced a few studies that have been done on Snus.

The inhalation into the lungs of propylene glycol and nicotine is not really an issue. We all know the effects of nicotine inhalation, and propylene glycol inhalation has actually been proven beneficial in many studies. It's the flavoring and possible trace contaminants that are the issue, and they are most certainly in low percentages.

Using processed tobacco in your mouth will still lead to problems, it's just that the way Snus is used that makes it a great harm reduction tool.

In the end, regardless of which one you choose, it's probably better than smoking.

[dEFinitionofEPIC]

Using processed tobacco in your mouth will still lead to problems, it's just that...

Actually...out of any form of smokeless tobacco snus by far has the lowest level of nitrosamines and tobacco-specific carcinogens. There is no conclusive evidence that snus increases ones chances of getting oral cancer...and its been around a long time... So I don't think its guaranteed to cause any problems just because it is used in the mouth....

[D_Struct]

Actually...out of any form of smokeless tobacco snus by far has the lowest level of nitrosamines and tobacco-specific carcinogens. There is no conclusive evidence that snus increases ones chances of getting oral cancer...and its been around a long time... So I don't think its guaranteed to cause any problems just because it is used in the mouth....

Well, all things being equal, if e-cigs are what they SAY they are, you're not going to be dealing with any of the tobacco-specific carcinogens or nitrosamines. Big IF.

Just depends, I suppose.

I use snus, as well. I enjoy it, and it's encouraging to read all of the studies done on it, to date.

[UkUsa]

I've been reading up a little on snus recently. Really thinking of trying some. Most times the e cig is great but sometimes it just don't do it, or it isn't pheasible to sit and puff away. Also there are the enevitable breakdowns, dead batteries, lack of supplies.

I have found some negatives about snus, even mentions of carcinogens. But overall, if you have to have nicotine it looks like a better option than analogs or chewing tobacco.

As for which is better, snus or e cigs. Hmmm my gut tells me that ecigs maybe better, but as D-struct says, it's the flavorings that is my only concern.

I'm sure i am going to try some Snus soon. Especially since our local gas station has started selling the camel snus now. It's definitely worth a shot.

In the meantime i'll have to go back and see if can find some the studies i was reading a few days back.

[TropicalBob]

For me, it's not e-cigs versus snus. It's e-cigs AND snus.

Snus has a 200-year history of safe use. E-cigs have no identified danger points, although everyone admits we are guinea pigs and testing hasn't been done by scientific methods. I made my choice. I use both. And don't apologize for that fact. To me, in the end, these seem the safest practical way to obtain nicotine I feel I need.

Bluntly, no available harm reduction alternative is as hazardous to health as inhaling cigarette smoke!

You want safe though? Nasal snuff. It was the first recorded use of tobacco and has never had a single instance of cancer attributed to its use.

[D_Struct]

For me, it's not e-cigs versus snus. It's e-cigs AND snus.

I just wanted to quote this due to how great a combo it is.

The snus really gets me through the tough times. Great addition to the routine to help me stay away from the analogs.

[BeRight]

I also use e-cig and snus (sweden origin only) at the same time.

E-cig only was not enough for me to stop analog cigs.

[paladinx]

very interesting feedback thanks guys. About the poster talking about PG being good for you. What studies? Have they studied a mass amount of e-smokers for years who are inhaling the stuff constantly? despite descriptions of PG, I have not read really anything that is convincing right now. Sure PG, or many other chemicals are completely harmless when you are not overexposed to them. But your talking about inhaling large quantities, concentrated quantities daily. I think there is a big diff. If there are studies on this, i would love to read it, and apologize.

my fear is that those who are interested in e smoking are going to start funding their own research, same way the tobacco companies did it way back int he day. they actually had doctors coming on saying how good for you smoking is LOL


I was all for snus. but i read something that it has been proven to cause pancreatic cancer. that kind of worried me a little bit. But one thing that made me feel a little better. they said out of i think 10 thousand or 20 thousand snus users, 9 of those will get pancreatic cancer from snus. and four of them will get pancreatic cancer from not using any tobacco products at all. So i guess the correlation is weak at besT?