ok so correct me if im wrong but aren't snus just like chew and contain the same awful chemicals and carcinogens? yes its an alternative to smoking but one still proven to cause face cancers........ why not just stick to the vapes?
Snus just as bad as chews?
- Thread starter deeptrout
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
First of all, what proof do you have for the above claim? Second of all, why is it that snus used to contain a warning stating that it may cause cancer, but as of 2005, is no longer required to contain that warning, because NONE of the numerous health studies of snus, going back for a century, showed ANY increased risk of oral cancer? Which brings us back to the first question; What is your proof for the above claim?
Those 'same awful chemicals and carcinogens' you mention above are known as tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNA). Traditionally, oral tobaccos produced in the US were fermented. Fermentation produces high levels of TSNAs and there are studies that demonstrate the levels of TSNAs of US produced oral tobaccos INCREASED as the product sat on the shelves.
Snus, and I am talking about Swedish snus here, is regulated as a food by the Swedes, so is subject to an entirely different set of regulations than US oral tobaccos. Additionally, snus is not fermented. Instead, snus is steam pasteurized, which leads to exceedingly low levels of TSNAs, with many Swedish snus containing TSNAs in FRACTIONS of 1 part per milliion. Here's a quote from an older study (2001), which demonstrates the principle:
"The concentration of the total TSNA in the leading U.S. moist oral snuff brands varies greatly, from 7.5 to 128 µg per g dry tobacco (Table 2). For comparison with the TSNA concentrations in the leading five U.S. snuff brands, a popular Swedish snuff brand, which was produced under anaerobic conditions, had even lower TSNA values (2.8 µg/g) than the lowest U.S. snuff brand. This demonstrates that snuff can be produced with low concentration of TSNA and with it, with a significantly reduced potential for carcinogenic activity. The technology clearly exists to manufacture snuff with low levels of TSNA, as shown by the Swedish brand and the brand made by Swedish Match.
The TSNA levels in the two leading U.S. snuff brands, accounting for 69 % of the 1999 U.S. market (14), were found to increase during 6 months storage at room temperature between 30 and 130 %, while the TSNA concentration in the Swedish brand increased inconsequentially." Source
This article references a much larger study, conducted over a period of years:
"The study also showed that using snus did not increase the risk of oral cancer, "
Last edited:
Snus and chew look similar, but the manufacturing process and the secondary ingredients are VERY different.
Chew uses sugar products and is fermented.
Snus uses salt and is pasterized similar what is done to milk products. This drastically reduces the TSNAs (Tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines) in tobacco that have been found to be carcinogenic.
Here's a short quote from an article by Larry Waters:
"The biggest concern of any tobacco user is cancer. Snus does not cause lung cancer because it has no tar and is not inhaled. But there are naturally occurring substances in tobacco that are carcinogenic. They are called TSNA's.
The lower the TSNA level in a tobacco product, the less harmful/risky it is concerning cancer. Oral and throat cancer is most associated with American Chewing Tobacco or Dip. Here are some products and numbers to make this real for you.
Copenhagen has a TSNA level of 41.1
Skoal has a TSNA level of 64.0
Silver Creek has a TSNA level of 127.9
OK, nice numbers, but compared to what? Snus is an oral tobacco product too. Here are two Scandinavian Snus's and their TSNA levels:
Ettan Snus made by Swedish Match in Sweden has a TSNA level of 2.8
Offroad and Phantom, two brands with multiple flavors of Snus made by V2 Tobacco have TSNA levels of 0.7
The Difference is HUGE: remember, the lower the TSNA level, the better."
And to your question as to why not just stick to vapes?
Simple: The more ammunition you have in your arsonnel to combat addiction and in harm reduction, the better.
I can't speak for everyone here, but those of us who find that vaping just doesn't work as a complete replacement for cigarettes find a HUGE comfort in the fact that there are many alternatives to choose from. And most importantly, alternatives that are safer than what started our addiction.
The Swedes have proven that the use of snus has greatly reduced the cancers associated with smoking. While their tobacco use is just as high as any other country in all of Europe, their cancer risk as a whole is the lowest in those same countries.
So, to answer your original question:
No - snus and chew aren't the same at all.
You are welcome. Now you know why the US produced Camel 'SNUS' scares the hell out of me.
And I LOVE vaping, but it is a hell of alot of maintenance. With snus, I throw a tin in the back pocket and walk out the door. With vaping, I have to grab the e-cig, a back up battery, possibly a charger, a bottle of e-liquid, a tool to push the cartridge thingy out for refills, etc. Why must I carry a man-purse to get my nicotine?
Last edited:
Wow - lot of activity on this thread while I was preparing an answer.
I need to learn to type faster...
So more info, if you're interested:
http://snuscentral.org/the-facts/102-safety-faq.html
http://snuscentral.org/the-facts/103-reduced-harm-tobacco-faq.html
I need to learn to type faster...
So more info, if you're interested:
http://snuscentral.org/the-facts/102-safety-faq.html
http://snuscentral.org/the-facts/103-reduced-harm-tobacco-faq.html
Last edited:
THAT"S the fractions of parts per million I was talking about!
Actually, the modern US oral tobaccos aren't as high in TSNAs as they used to be. This pdf has a chart on page 7 which shows the TSNAs of US oral tobaccos as of 2003. Both Oliver Twist-tropical and Redman, were actually lower in TSNAs (1.5 ppm and 1.8 ppm respectively) than the Swedish snus (which ranged from 2.0-2.2 ppm)..
Last edited:
Thank you for the references, but do you, or anyone for that matter, know of any studies that compare Swedish Snus to the American (Camel) Snus? The sources you cite only compare "traditional" chewing tobacco makers, as far as I can tell. Are there any sources that indicate American Snus are made with the same sugar-fermentation method as chewing tobacco?
By the way, since I'm full of questions, what the hell are Snus anyway? I see listings in that PDF for moist and dry snuff, as well as chewing tobacco and cigarettes, but not Snus. People are always asking me, but I really don't know what the hell they are! LOL
Am I dreaming?, but are there folks out there who are actually comparing Snus as an alternative to E-cigs????? How does Snus wind up on an E-cig forum?? Snus may or may not be free of chemicals found in flamable cigarettes, but that's not the point. The major inconvenience of Snus (or chew tobacco) is the requirement to SPIT - and that is disgusting, socially unacceptable, inconvenient, unsanitary, --- need I go on?
No. However, Camel does make a real snus, found here,. Camel SNUS is not a real snus. Real snus is manufactured according to Swedish food regulations and includes a list of all known ingredients. Camel SNUS does none of these things. You do not know what you are getting if you use Camel SNUS, just as you've no idea what you are getting if you purchase US analogs. No one knows what is in them. Of course, if you trust Big Tobacco and trust they have your best interest at heart, none of the above will bother you.
The sweetener in Camel SNUS is fake, as far as I am aware.
.
Snus is moist snuff. Snuff is ground tobacco.
Last edited:
No. Some of us moved on to snus from e-cigs, because we found we liked it better. As far as maintenance, there is no comparison and snus wins hands down. Additionally, with tobacco moving under FDA regulation, it is prudent to have alternatives to smoking besides vaping, in the event the FDA bans either PVs or e-liquids. We can't even stop there either, in the event importation of snus is banned down the road.
Because it is applicable to these particular sections of the forum titled "Other Alternatives to Smoking' and "Smokeless Tobacco." Oh wait, aren't vapers also using snus portions to create tobacco flavor for e-liquids? I wonder if that might make snus relevant here as well?
Snus IS free of those chemicals. There is no question about that. There are studies going back for YEARS on snus, since snus has existed for two centuries. Where are the studies on the health effects and safety or the lack thereof for your e-liquids, particular long -term studies carried out over periods of years?
How very strange, given one of the major selling points of using snus is you don't have to spit. I have been using snus for weeks and not once have I ever had to spit.
Have you thought about a career with the anti-smoking lobby? You most certainly have the rhetoric down in spades. The only thing you missed was mentioning "THE CHILDREN (tm)."
The truth is, using snus is no different than using a breath mint and there is NO need whatsoever to spit when using snus. If using mini portions of snus, no one will have any way of knowing you are using tobacco at all, unless you tell them, making tobacco usage a private issue that is no one else's business but yours.
Last edited:
I use both e-cigs and snus, and I know I'm not the only female in here using the snus too. In fact, there's a thread in here under the "smokeless tobacco" section about that. I did alot of research before I bought any snus and had the same worries as you. I didn't just look at the Swedish snus sites either, I looked under third party testing to get the unbiased scoop on them. What I found totally changed my mind on smokeless tobacco.
Snus portions are extremely convenient to use and virtually mess-free. There is no spitting, nobody can see it, they come in a wide range of flavors and strengths so there's something everyone would like, and they work very well. Most brands also have a lid that you can put your used snus in and then throw it away when you get home so there's no littering. There is also loose (los) snus, which is what I use at home most of the time now. But for being out of the house, I always use portions. In Sweden where it is more common than cigarettes, 20% of the snus users are women. Number of Swedish Women Using 'Snus' Grows In fact, there are some brands that are being made that are targeting the female consumers. I'm sure they wouldn't be doing this if they didn't think there was a huge potential to get women to switch over to snus. Vertigo a Snus for women
I don't plan on giving up my e-cigs or my snus...they each have a place in my plan to stay off of analogs and are way more safe than analogs.
Firstly snus is not chewing tobacco, you just put it in and leave it there.
It's like Nicorette gum without the requirement to chew it up a bit first before placing it against the gums. Not to mention that, unlike Nicorette, it has meaning levels of nicotine, is pleasant to use (for those of us who don't like gum) and has a huge variety of good flavours.
There is no spitting with snus and, besides, all the other adjectives already apply to smoking anyway [and "disgusting" is entirely subjective].
Snus is just another weapon in the battle to keep of analogs.
For me, better than e-cigs because they're just so easy - put one in and forget about it. One small box in a pocket and you're good to go. No charging, no refilling, no leaking, no upsetting people who think that vapour is smoke, etc...
I'm back to that rather hostile snus post!!!
There is NO spitting with snus. That is done only with chew tobacco -- and you'll not find discussions of that here.
Snus has more than a century of proven safe use in Sweden. The snus I personally use is from a company that started in 1822. This part of the forum is devoted to alternatives to cigarettes, of which the e-cig is one.
Did you see the Continuum of Risk graphs that Sen. Richard Burr displayed to the Senate? Did you see that e-cigs are RISKIER than using snus? They are. They are riskier than using dissolvable tobacco.
You'd do yourself a favor by investigating snus and might be converted. Unlike e-cigs, it is discrete in use and can be used anywhere, is more satisfying of nicotine needs in my opinion, and is cheaper.
There is NO spitting with snus. That is done only with chew tobacco -- and you'll not find discussions of that here.
Snus has more than a century of proven safe use in Sweden. The snus I personally use is from a company that started in 1822. This part of the forum is devoted to alternatives to cigarettes, of which the e-cig is one.
Did you see the Continuum of Risk graphs that Sen. Richard Burr displayed to the Senate? Did you see that e-cigs are RISKIER than using snus? They are. They are riskier than using dissolvable tobacco.
You'd do yourself a favor by investigating snus and might be converted. Unlike e-cigs, it is discrete in use and can be used anywhere, is more satisfying of nicotine needs in my opinion, and is cheaper.
I just LOVE when someone who is completely and utterly ignorant about a particular subject pontificates on in a condescending manner.
There is no more efficient way of making a fool out of yourself...
There is no more efficient way of making a fool out of yourself...
That's interesting. I'm assuming this is from the recent bill that has been passing through congress. How can he/anyone say that in the absence of peer-reviewed studies (which there are for snus of course but not for e-cigs or dissolvables AFAIK)? Analogs vs. snus or nasal snuff is an easy contest the rest is ... unknown ... at this time.
Because the modern myth of the tobacco temperance movement is that tobacco usage is "disgusting, socially unacceptable, inconvenient, unsanitary, --- need I go on??" Within the temperance movement, ALL tobacco products are lumped in with cigarettes, with no differences in health effects noted. Look at Europe. Snus is banned everywhere except Sweden and Norway, yet which country has the lowest rates of tobacco related cancers in all of Europe? Sweden, a country where snus is not banned and a country in which snus is the primary form of tobacco usage.
Last edited:
Hilarious! Well y'all showed her, haha
snus came before e-cigs for me. It was only natural for me to go where
"birds of a feather" are.
I rather enjoy snusing and happy I quit the way I did. If I thought it was disgusting or required spitting it would be out of the question.
I'm just happy I would never consider buying an analog if my e-cig broke.
snus came before e-cigs for me. It was only natural for me to go where
"birds of a feather" are.
I rather enjoy snusing and happy I quit the way I did. If I thought it was disgusting or required spitting it would be out of the question.
I'm just happy I would never consider buying an analog if my e-cig broke.
- Status
Similar threads
