Please read this article

**KarlvB** · 23-06-09, 12:38 PM

Not a lot

Seriously though...

The argument that snus should form part of any sensible harm reduction strategy has been around for a while and Sweden does appear to be a good example that it does actually work.

Some have argued the contrary though by saying that high taxes and massive clampdown on smoking in public places has led to the reduced number of smokers.

I for one do not buy that argument as the UK has some of the harshest laws governing where you can smoke as well as super high taxes, but I have yet to see anyone give up for either of those reasons.

There are also those that are concerned by the health effects of snus.

Back to your original question. Snus is less harmful than smoking. Not harmless. There is a difference.

If you are interested in all the medical literature released to date have a look at this report by the New Zealand Ministry of Health.

http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publicatio...ss_tobacco.pdf

Most of the health issues have been discussed quite a bit in this section of the forum so do trawl through. However the most recent concern has been the fact that snus use has been linked to a doubling of your chance to get pancreatic cancer. So instead of 4 in a 100000 your chance would be 8 in a 100000. Naturally this study has been criticized a fair bit by the industry.

http://www.swedishmatch.com/en/Snus-...reatic-cancer/

Also the snus manufacturers have worked hard at reducing the levels of harmful TSNAs.

Here is a discussion regarding the current levels of TSNAs in the various brands.

http://www.snuson.com/viewtopic.php?t=2998

**beja** · 23-06-09, 04:28 PM

Just want to preface my post with the fact that I'm a snubie and still learning........

Just finished reading the article posted at: http://www.v2tobacco.com/snus-quality-standard.php

This statement came to my attention:

However, it was shown that some products moist snuff manufactured by the Swedish manufacturers to sell the USA and elsewhere higher levels of nitrosamine than those sold on the domestic market in Sweden.

Does this mean that my beloved General Dry Mini Mint isn't produced with the same standards as say GR, since it's made for the American market? I believe the Dry Mini Mint bears the same GotiaTek label. I understand that the TSNA levels can very from brand to brand, but I'm assuming that Dry Mini Mint is still way better than any American produced product.

**KarlvB** · 23-06-09, 04:55 PM

I am confused. I went to that link and I can't find the passage you quoted.

However, I think the key distinction is the words "moist snuff"

Moist snuff is usually used to refer to dip (Timber Wolf, Longhorn, Red Man) produced by companies like SM.

So though the TSNAs are higher than snus they are still lower than a lot of the domestic / US produced dip.

The snus you receive is manufactured in Sweden and will have the same low levels of TSNA as the snus that the Swedish market receives.

**RobsanX** · 23-06-09, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by KarlvB

I am confused. I went to that link and I can't find the passage you quoted.

However, I think the key distinction is the words "moist snuff"

Moist snuff is usually used to refer to dip (Timber Wolf, Longhorn, Red Man) produced by companies like SM.

So though the TSNAs are higher than snus they are still lower than a lot of the domestic / US produced dip.

The snus you receive is manufactured in Sweden and will have the same low levels of TSNA as the snus that the Swedish market receives.

That's how i read it too...

**Lucky Striker** · 23-06-09, 07:13 PM

The last credible study I read on the subject had (in PPM) Ettan at 1.7, Skoal at 17, and Copenhagen at 41. That definitely didn't restore my faith in the American smokeless category, nor have I ever seen any credible study that showed that American dip is any safer (as in, the TSNA count has dropped) than it was thirty years ago. In my opinion, that shit will still rot your mouth and put you squarely in the 50/50 bracket for getting some sort of cancer, oral or otherwise. Safer than cigarettes? Sure. Anywhere NEAR the safe levels of Swedish snus? Nope. The brands like Kayak and Timber Wolf are a little better in that regard, but still too high for me personally.

Yet, for some reason every store in the state that sells tobacco carries a wide range of smokeless tobacco, aside from genuine Snus. That's a shame. And it's piss poor commentary on legislation designed to cock block snus from getting a good footing here.

**beja** · 23-06-09, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by KarlvB

I am confused. I went to that link and I can't find the passage you quoted.

However, I think the key distinction is the words "moist snuff"

Moist snuff is usually used to refer to dip (Timber Wolf, Longhorn, Red Man) produced by companies like SM.

So though the TSNAs are higher than snus they are still lower than a lot of the domestic / US produced dip.

The snus you receive is manufactured in Sweden and will have the same low levels of TSNA as the snus that the Swedish market receives.

Thanks for the response. Sorry about the incorrect link. I'm not sure where I got that. Here is the correct link: http://www.snus.name/snus-tsna.php

**HK11** · 24-06-09, 04:35 AM

Im not concerned about longevity as much as quality of life. If snus kills me so be it, but at least I can breath !

Health is the slowest way to die, amirite guys?

**justintempler** · 24-06-09, 06:11 AM

TSNA Levelsa in American and Swedish Tobacco Products, 2003

**Soft Morning, City!** · 24-06-09, 06:33 AM

Nice to see Red Man scoring so low in terms of TSNAs. I like a little bit of Red Man from time to time.

**Lucky Striker** · 26-06-09, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by justintempler

TSNA Levelsa in American and Swedish Tobacco Products, 2003

This is a faulty study, and I'll tell you why I think that.

Look at what was tested. Dry weight. That's not what we put into our bodies. The article I read (and it was in a printed source, so I apologize for not having an online source) tested for total matter, which in the case of most moist snuff breaks down to about 8/10ths dry and 2/10ths moist. The differences between dry yield and moist yield in terms of TSNA's are astounding.

Ettan with the moisture seperated yielded 1.7 TSNA count, but when tested with the moisture balance in place, yielded almost double that at 3.4 PPM. Similarly, American snuff almost tripled its TSNA yield. That has more to do with the way it's processed more than anything. If you see a study that cites TSNA yield at less than 20 ppm on Cope or Skoal, then you're not getting the complete story.

This is why you see some studies that were done at the same time but yielded different results. Ettan now rates at less than 1ppm dry weight, and less than 2 ppm while moist. Swedish Match has truly streamlined their production methods in the last five years or so. It's not because the tobacco from year to year is so drastically different, it's that different testing methods yield different test results.

In all honesty, when I see a study like this that only reports dry weight yield, it makes me think that its biased in favor of the Smokeless industry. We need all the help we can get, but not through manipulated data. Don't show me how much TSNA's COULD be in there if I magically displaced all moisture from the snus I ingest. Show me what is in what I put in my mouth. [/i]

**KarlvB** · 26-06-09, 12:13 AM

I hear what you are saying Lucky Striker, but how does that explain this study by the Swedish Health Authority?

http://www.slv.se/upload/dokument/Ra...enskt_snus.pdf

I don't see why they would purposely opt for a lower TSNA count

**Lucky Striker** · 26-06-09, 01:23 AM

Karl, the Swedish Health authority report is not measured in ppm, it's measured in mcg/g (one million mcg in a gram). Therefore the total TSNA count displayed in the Swedish report would read, for Swedish Match brands, 0.8-1.1. Worded the way (or should I say, numbered) the way most reports of this type read, that would actually be a TSNA count of 3.6 - 3.8. That would indicate to me that this was measured in total weight, not dry weight.

**uk.user** · 06-07-09, 10:23 AM

I don`t why assholes in brussels.....haven`t lifted the ban .....yet.....i think the gum and patch companys(nicotine ones i mean !)...are giving the M.E.P`s a backhander...to keep it in place :evil:

**MN_Snuser** · 08-07-09, 03:00 AM

http://www.scribd.com/doc/1041204/Na...oSOS029Program

Follow the link above. See page 86 of the paper for pretty current TSNA numbers for American Moist Snuff.

Please read this article

Please read this article

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Related Topics