Today’s Washington Post: “In the smoker-heavy state of Kentucky, a cancer center is suggesting something that most health experts won’t and the tobacco industry can’t: If you really want to quit, switch to smoke-free tobacco. The James Graham Brown Cancer Center and the University of Louisville are aiming their “Switch and Quit” campaign at the city of Owensboro. It uses print, radio, billboard and other advertising to urge smokers to swap their cigarettes for smokeless tobacco and other products that do not deliver nicotine by smoke.” That’s snuff country, too.
Fantastic news! It’s about time some sense was brought into this argument- harm reduction instead of abstinence is so logical compared to the scaremongering that we usually see. It looks like these people actually want to prevent people from getting cancer…
And to think here in India a report by a health committee has adviced the govt to ban all forms of smokeless tobacco immediately. What rubbish!
@Vikas: I am of the opinion that tobacco legislation is rarely if ever anything to do with public health, and everything to do with increasing revenue or garnering votes. Chewing tobacco and snus are banned in the UK, and I believe also in the EU, with the exception that snus is legal in a couple of countries. I asked for some snuff in a tobacconists in Britain, and got chatting with the guy. I explained that I was about to take a long plane flight, and that snuff was ideal to keep my cravings at bay. He showed me a product that was similar to snus. It was a small stick of tobacco; you break a piece off and put it under your upper lip. I didn’t buy it, but now I kinda wish I did just to satisfy my curiosity. I wonder what it was, whether it was a legal oral tobacco, or if it was a product designed for a different use but could also be used orally? Edit: seems I just answered my own question, and I was wrong about chewing tobacco being illegal in the UK! For some reason, chewing tobacco is legal, but snus isn’t. Weird.
@doctorbeat hell yeah, you saw some original old-style british chewing tobacco then. it is the same as Oliver Twists chewing tobacco bits but you have to cut the bits by yourself and in addition to that be warned that these old-style robes are way stronger in nicotine and taste then Oliver Twist is. anyway, imho both work well to keep the ciggys away. cheers!
The man running the program is Dr. Brad Rodu, who holds an endowed chair in Tobacco Harm Reduction at the University of Louisville. He also writes the “Tobacco Truth” blog: http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/ He’s probably the most well-known American advocate for snus and snuff. @doctorbeat: It is illegal to sell snus in the UK, but possession is perfectly legal. Some determined British snusers order from overseas. I think they may pay some heavy customs fees for the privilege, however. (UK snusers, please feel free to correct me if I’m mistaken.)
Yeah, I brought a few cans of Camel snus back through UK customs on my way home from the States a couple of years ago. It’s weird that if you put tobacco in a teabag it suddenly becomes illegal, especially since it’s a lower nitrosamine version than the stuff available in the UK.
@PipenSnusnSnuff: Thanks for the link, lots of good info there.
Mark my words this is a big deal. When this program succedes in reducing tobacco related mortality rates dramatically, note will be taken. Right here is the sprout of a second snuffing golden age. Or at least that is what I think.
Snuff shall rise again!
You’d NEVER EVER EVER hear that in USA. Unless they’re making money off of it or have further "vested interest’'. Our country is so corrupt it’s terrible. Led by CRIMINALS. Okay I’m done sorry.
I wonder if it might be worth emailing Dr. Brad Rodu and making him aware of how the pact act makes it next to impossible to obtain nasal snuff domestically? I really believe that nasal snuff got caught up in the pact act as collateral damage, maybe one day we’ll see an exception made for it.
@doctorbeat More often than not they word it that way ON PURPOSE. When it comes to Bills, Acts, etc. It’s done ALL THE TIME. Gotta read the fine print- alot of times they’ll put it at the very end of a LONG memo so that they’ll get tired of reading and scan right over it without ever knowing. That’s how they tried passing E-cig laws but we had a lawyer on our side to point it out for us. Pay attention because in America, any kind of cigarette competition is their ENEMY. It’s EVIL and I’ll end it at that. I’ve been into this subject and many others as of late and could go on and on. However this isn’t a politics forum so I’m finished… lol
@MikeMoose @bob Yeah you two !!! Totally my lines too. Hope it comes true in the near future, would be awesome to meet strangers on the street who taking snuff.
That’s great. It’s about time they start using their heads. Let’s see how the nanny’s try to expand their BS to attack snuff. It helped me quit cigarettes after 50 yrs & I couldn’t be happier & healthier (according to my Doctor).
It’s very interesting that the anti tobacco lobby isn’t interested in harm reduction, and paints a false picture of the dangers of smokeless tobacco. I hate it when such political decisions are based on motives instead of science. Smokeless tobacco does carry risks, but those risks are tiny compared to those of smoking cigarettes. I really hope this campaign is successful, not only because of the possible benefits to our hobby, but also because of the deaths it will prevent, and the triumph of science and reason over political agenda.
This is great! At least common sense prevails somewhere.
or shitty assumptions. A lot of these anti tobacco idiots project their stupidity onto the world. So they think others have trouble telling the diffrence between things. That if they try other tobacco they’ll just smoke more. Which is funny. I really think that they think smokers have no sense of self preservation.
I just saw this on the Bernard Snuff Web site. There is no risk of getting cancer by snuffing Snuff-Tobacco! The WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IRAC) just published their studies on smokeless tobacco and its correlation to cancer. Their “studies on nasal use of snuff did not provide conclusive evidence of a relationship with cancer.” cf. WHO, IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans; Vol.89; Smokeless Tobacco and some Tobacco-specific N-Nitrosamines; Lyon France 2007; p.366
A century ago cigarette companies weren’t artifically aging their tobacco by spraying it with countless man-made chemicals.