My comment is awaiting moderation:
Jim Bogden's suggestion brings to mind the concept of "Newspeak". We must come up with more and better ways to hide the truth from the public. We must not, under any circumstances, allow the public to learn that some smokeless products are actually up to 99% less harmful than inhaling smoke. Perhaps we could get the Lancet to purge all copies of the article that reported "There was little difference in health-adjusted life expectancy between smokers who quit all tobacco and smokers who switch to snus."
Assessment of Swedish snus for tobacco harm reduct... [Lancet. 2007] - PubMed result
There are many more articles that report on the reduction in a variety of smoking-related diseases. All these would need to be purged. A regular Fahrenheit 451 party! Furthermore, the medical journals will have to ensure that all future published research compares the health of smokeless tobacco users to never-users of tobacco, not to the health of continuing smokers or former smokers. That way, the lie can be kept alive.
Perhaps the slogan, "Smokeless is smoking"? Or if using more disgusting language is preferable, we could start referring to "snus" as "snot." Would that work?
It is better for those who cannot give up nicotine to continue inhaling smoke than to switch to a product that provides measurable health improvements. If their wheezing and coughing disappears once they switch to something like snus or an electronic cigarette, those former smokers might get the wrong idea and continue using the product—especially if they are using nicotine as self-medication.
We know that a sizable percentage of nicotine users who cannot quit are self-medicating problems of depression, anxiety, attention deficit disorder, and memory impairments. We need some strong ad campaigns to reach these folks before they learn that their dysfunctions can be effectively controlled by switching to snus or nicotine vapor. How about, "Feeling depressed? Pop a Prozac instead of lighting up." Or, "Feeling confused and fuzzy-headed? Light up with Ritalin instead of a cigarette."
Since nicotine is the only known substance that can prevent the build-up of alpha-synuclein protein deposits in the brain, we will need to convince the older population that is beginning to feel the effects of early dementia that memory lapses can be fun and entertaining. Why fight it?
Yes, folks, all of the above observations and suggestions are made with tongue firmly in cheek. But this is no laughing matter. The Tobacco Control Community needs to wake up to the fact that the dream of being able to wipe out all nicotine use is just that—a dream. The Tobacco Control Community needs to take a step back and ask why they began this war against smokers in the first place. Wasn’t the goal to improve health? If this war is successful, forcing those who are medically dependent on nicotine to live with cognitive dysfunctions, mood impairment, or mounting dementia is not in keeping with preserving public health. If, as I suspect, the war fails, how many lives can be made healthier and longer by offering acceptable options to smokers that preserve their ability to remain functional members of society?