Research: Smokeless not Gateway to Smoking

[Vocalek]

New medical journal article by Brad Rodu (who sometimes visits our forum) & P Cole.

Evidence against a gateway from smokeless tobacco ... [Nicotine Tob Res. 2010] - PubMed result

The researchers looked at two groups: White males 18 years and older, and boys 16-17 years old.

They divided each group into three categories, based on which product they initially started out with. The ever-smoking prevalence rates for each were:

Ages 18+
Smoking Initiators - 82.2%
ST Initiators - 10.7%
Dual Initiators - 7.1%

The current smoking prevalence rates were
Smoking Initiators - 34.7%

The prevalence ratio for Dual Initiators was 10% higher (PR=1.1) and significantly lower for ST Initiators (PR=0.8)

Boys
Almost 92% were either Smoking Initiators or Dual Initiators

The current smoking prevalence rates were
Smoking Initiators - 42.8%
The prevalence among ST users was less than half (PR=0.43)

CONCLUSIONS: ST use has played virtually no role in smoking initiation among White men and boys, the demographic groups among which ST use is most prevalent. There is evidence that, compared with cigarette initiators, ST initiators are significantly less likely to smoke. This suggests that ST may play a protective role.

 

[Caesarea]

New medical journal article by Brad Rodu (who sometimes visits our forum) & P Cole.

Evidence against a gateway from smokeless tobacco ... [Nicotine Tob Res. 2010] - PubMed result

The researchers looked at two groups: White males 18 years and older, and boys 16-17 years old.

They divided each group into three categories, based on which product they initially started out with. The ever-smoking prevalence rates for each were:

Ages 18+
Smoking Initiators - 82.2%
ST Initiators - 10.7%
Dual Initiators - 7.1%

The current smoking prevalence rates were
Smoking Initiators - 34.7%

The prevalence ratio for Dual Initiators was 10% higher (PR=1.1) and significantly lower for ST Initiators (PR=0.8)

Boys
Almost 92% were either Smoking Initiators or Dual Initiators

The current smoking prevalence rates were
Smoking Initiators - 42.8%
The prevalence among ST users was less than half (PR=0.43)

Quote:CONCLUSIONS: ST use has played virtually no role in smoking initiation among White men and boys, the demographic groups among which ST use is most prevalent. There is evidence that, compared with cigarette initiators, ST initiators are significantly less likely to smoke. This suggests that ST may play a protective role.

Thanks Vocalek - that chimes in with how I feel about using smokeless. It will never lead me back to lit tobacco products.

Best



C.

 

[Vocalek]

Here are some quotes from Tobacco Truth, Dr. Rodu's blog:

Our study showed that the prevalence of current smoking among white men who were cigarette initiators was 35%. In comparison, the prevalence of smoking among smokeless tobacco initiators was only 28%, a significantly lower statistic. If the gateway effect was real, smokeless initiators would have had smoking rates similar to – or higher than – cigarette initiators.

The results for boys were even more impressive. Current smoking among cigarette initiators was 43%, but only 18% of smokeless tobacco initiators smoked. This means that boys who had started with smokeless tobacco were less than half as likely to be smoking at the time of the survey.

I consider snus my backup plan in case of an electronic cigarette ban. But the direction FDA is going in frightens me. It looks to me as if their goal is to get rid of every single product that is safer than smoking, and then make smoking even deadlier. I guess this quote from FDA's Lawrence Deyton sums up FDA's perspective:

"In the long term, the most effective way to reduce the harm from tobacco products is to prevent people from becoming addicted..."

The title of the article is (ironically) Tobacco Product Regulation — A Public Health Approach. I did a search in the article for terms like "cessation" and "NRT" and came up with zip. In other words, if you are a current smoker, to quote that British nurse in a YouTube video, "You should just...die."

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/NEJMp1004152.pdf?ssource=hcrc

 

[TWISTED VICTOR]

Good stuff, Vocalek. I've seen a small amount of other studies done in Sweden which mirror these findings, also a Tobacco Health Study done by the Royal College of Physicians (the folks who stirred up the dangers of smoking back in the early '60's) had the same findings. It just seems there's too much money passing through the hands of lobbyists to let the truth come out in America. In the recent passing of the PactAct, which includes tobacco taxes on ST the same as cigarettes, a greatly reduced harm alternative was vilified by the FDA and anti-tobacco organizations without justification. No proof to support their claims of any kind by any stretch, with all the evidence to date (many very long term studies) pointing to the contrary. It's maddening . Thanks for this new study to add to my ever-growing list .