---
http://tobaccoharmreduction.org/index.htm
TobaccoHarmReduction.org is the leading source of information of safer alternatives for smokers who cannot or do not wish to quit using nicotine.
This website was developed and maintained by the University of Alberta Medical School's Department of Public Health Sciences and then the University of Alberta School of Public Health from the time of its creation in 2006 until the last researcher working on tobacco harm reduction left the university in 2010. It is now owned and maintained by Dr. Carl V. Phillips's independent research institute (read more about us)
---
This website was created and is maintained by:
Carl V. Phillips (curriculum vitae), and his research group
in association with
Brad Rodu (curriculum vitae), Professor of Medicine, Endowed Chair, Tobacco Harm Reduction Research at the University of Louisville.
No funder has played any role in the creation, design, or content of this website, which was entirely the product of University of Alberta faculty and other academic staff and now will continue under the auspices of CV Phillips's new research institute (details to follow).
----
[2.3] Are you trying to sell people on using smokeless tobacco?
-instead of smoking, yes; otherwise, no.
We are not encouraging anyone who does not already use nicotine to try it or use it (in any form). Nicotine products cost you money and time, and even smokeless tobacco and pharmaceutical nicotine products are probably a little bit bad for your health.
It is unlikely that many people reading this have never tried nicotine, or that our harm reduction message would cause those people to start. Most people who try nicotine do not like it enough to become regular users. Many who become regular users find later that smoking no longer suits them, and quit. But some keep using nicotine. These are the people we are trying to reach.
For those who are already smokeless tobacco users, we want to make sure they do not switch to smoking. Anti-tobacco activists frequently claim that all tobacco products are equally risky, which is the same as telling smokeless tobacco users "you might as well smoke". For those who have chosen to smoke, we want them to know there is an alternative besides "quitting or dying".
Does this mean if our message is successful that fewer cigarettes and more smokeless tobacco will be sold? Of course it does. But so what? When public health experts suggest that people eat more vegetables and whole grains, and less meat, some products sell better and some worse (assuming anyone takes the advice). Health advice is very often advice about consumption (and thus about purchases). None of us work for the tobacco industry (cigarettes or smokeless), invest in it, or are dependent on its profitability or lack thereof. For those of us who have received research grants from industry sources, the grants are not going to get any bigger or smaller if the markets shift a bit. Indeed, there is a trend toward the same companies marketing cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, which means that, more and more, any substitution is a wash for them. The only big change is the huge potential health benefit.
Frankly, we wish the companies that make smokeless tobacco would aggressively market it to smokers as a reduced-harm alternative which would really help our public health mission. Our impression is that the companies believe they would be forbidden from making such claims in most jurisdictions, and would face nasty attacks by anti-harm-reduction advocates. They make decisions based on what is best for their profitability – we have no illusions otherwise – and we direct our efforts based on what is best for public health. Sometimes those coincide, but not always.
-----------
We have attempted to make most of the content widely accessible; for concise and basic overviews, see our Interviews with the Experts below. Some of the material below is necessarily technical. If you find anything to be confusing, or would like to see other glossary entries or references, contact us at admin at tobaccoharmreduction.org or write to our blog, and we will attempt to do a better job of explaining. We also provide references for some of the FAQ entries, some to popular information and some to the scientific literature.
http://tobaccoharmreduction.org/index.htm
TobaccoHarmReduction.org is the leading source of information of safer alternatives for smokers who cannot or do not wish to quit using nicotine.
This website was developed and maintained by the University of Alberta Medical School's Department of Public Health Sciences and then the University of Alberta School of Public Health from the time of its creation in 2006 until the last researcher working on tobacco harm reduction left the university in 2010. It is now owned and maintained by Dr. Carl V. Phillips's independent research institute (read more about us)
---
This website was created and is maintained by:
Carl V. Phillips (curriculum vitae), and his research group
in association with
Brad Rodu (curriculum vitae), Professor of Medicine, Endowed Chair, Tobacco Harm Reduction Research at the University of Louisville.
No funder has played any role in the creation, design, or content of this website, which was entirely the product of University of Alberta faculty and other academic staff and now will continue under the auspices of CV Phillips's new research institute (details to follow).
----
[2.3] Are you trying to sell people on using smokeless tobacco?
-instead of smoking, yes; otherwise, no.
We are not encouraging anyone who does not already use nicotine to try it or use it (in any form). Nicotine products cost you money and time, and even smokeless tobacco and pharmaceutical nicotine products are probably a little bit bad for your health.
It is unlikely that many people reading this have never tried nicotine, or that our harm reduction message would cause those people to start. Most people who try nicotine do not like it enough to become regular users. Many who become regular users find later that smoking no longer suits them, and quit. But some keep using nicotine. These are the people we are trying to reach.
For those who are already smokeless tobacco users, we want to make sure they do not switch to smoking. Anti-tobacco activists frequently claim that all tobacco products are equally risky, which is the same as telling smokeless tobacco users "you might as well smoke". For those who have chosen to smoke, we want them to know there is an alternative besides "quitting or dying".
Does this mean if our message is successful that fewer cigarettes and more smokeless tobacco will be sold? Of course it does. But so what? When public health experts suggest that people eat more vegetables and whole grains, and less meat, some products sell better and some worse (assuming anyone takes the advice). Health advice is very often advice about consumption (and thus about purchases). None of us work for the tobacco industry (cigarettes or smokeless), invest in it, or are dependent on its profitability or lack thereof. For those of us who have received research grants from industry sources, the grants are not going to get any bigger or smaller if the markets shift a bit. Indeed, there is a trend toward the same companies marketing cigarettes and smokeless tobacco, which means that, more and more, any substitution is a wash for them. The only big change is the huge potential health benefit.
Frankly, we wish the companies that make smokeless tobacco would aggressively market it to smokers as a reduced-harm alternative which would really help our public health mission. Our impression is that the companies believe they would be forbidden from making such claims in most jurisdictions, and would face nasty attacks by anti-harm-reduction advocates. They make decisions based on what is best for their profitability – we have no illusions otherwise – and we direct our efforts based on what is best for public health. Sometimes those coincide, but not always.
-----------
We have attempted to make most of the content widely accessible; for concise and basic overviews, see our Interviews with the Experts below. Some of the material below is necessarily technical. If you find anything to be confusing, or would like to see other glossary entries or references, contact us at admin at tobaccoharmreduction.org or write to our blog, and we will attempt to do a better job of explaining. We also provide references for some of the FAQ entries, some to popular information and some to the scientific literature.
Comment