Do snus and e-cigarettes need a health warning? | Jeff Stier | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Great article by Jeff Stier. I look forward to talking with him later this week when Bill Godshall, fellow CASAA board member Greg Conley, and I attend the FDA workshop on Modified Risk tobacco Products.
Here's the author's bio: http://www.nationalcenter.org/bios/stier.html
And Vickie McKenna's interview with Jeff about the topic of Tobacco Harm Reduction: http://www.conservativeblog.org/amy...nmentspecial-interest-attacks-on-tobacco.html
Great article by Jeff Stier. I look forward to talking with him later this week when Bill Godshall, fellow CASAA board member Greg Conley, and I attend the FDA workshop on Modified Risk tobacco Products.
Compared to cigarettes, most newer tobacco products – including smokeless tobacco (or snus), dissolvable tobacco, and e-cigarettes – are less harmful for the user. In a 2008 report, the World Health Organisation's (WHO) study group on tobacco product regulation (pdf) stated, "There is little question that, in general, smokeless tobacco products are less harmful than combusted tobacco products such as cigarettes." This is because nicotine, while highly addictive, is not particularly bad for you. This is similar to caffeine in sugary soda: it's the excess sugar, not the caffeine, that does the real damage by causing obesity.
As yet, it's unclear how widely available these new products will be, how they will be marketed or how their reduced risks will be communicated. Will companies be allowed, for instance, to make truthful claims about their products' risk profiles? Or will newer, lower-risk products be regulated as harshly as cigarettes, as some are advocating?
Here's the author's bio: http://www.nationalcenter.org/bios/stier.html
And Vickie McKenna's interview with Jeff about the topic of Tobacco Harm Reduction: http://www.conservativeblog.org/amy...nmentspecial-interest-attacks-on-tobacco.html
Last edited: