I’ve been thinking about this recently, and the ramifications it could have, if it ever happens. There are different things to consider, such as the impact it would have on health, price, tax, availability, it becoming ‘trendy’, and all sorts. Any thoughts?

I thought that already happened, at least in here, lol edm

if that happened, I wouldn’t duck into the bathroom to take a pinch when I’m in public anymore! also, we might get more research about the health effects. I’m not convinced that there is even a single adverse effect for a snuff taker (apart from the effects already associated with nicotine on its own).

Disclaimed, intended as humor. If i would have expressed political sentiment it would not have been nearly this polite. Taxation 10g tin = $2.95 + $5.00 for state and local, a flurry of noise from the anti-tobacco groups because the whole thing targets children, a major US politician will come forward and say that he did sniff snuff but never inhaled (just kidding), pop stars will start sniffing during concerts and instead of cigarette lighters everyone in the crowd will wave their paisley print handkerchief. Big pharma will try to make up issues on health hazards since there will be no reason for the gum. E-Cigarette people will scoff since they get pure nicotine and we don’t. And last but not least, Wal-Mart will start carrying a full like of Toque (which honestly they should have at least a basic selection already).

Well said xapken! And all duty free shops at airports will stock snuff instead of cigarettes !!

I expect that if snuff became more popular it would be taxed beyond my pocket.

No doubt puritanical (if that word is not too loaded) factions would just try to stamp it out. I have the feeling that we are more or less a liberal minded (in the best possible sense) lot on here. That’s as close as I’m going to politics!

I don’t think it will be taxed like cigs. Even with chew becomeing more popular the trend isn’t to tax it like cigs. I think part of the tax on cigs passes because it’s just so darn gross. The tax on cigs really started to go up the more the public is aware of second hand smoke. Oh it will be taxed more but not like cigs.

Snuff is still highly taxed at present in India 80%excise+20%sales tax thereon.

I live here in Springfield, Missouri and we have just had an anti-smoking law passed so that you cannot smoke inside anywhere except your own home, and in some cases not even your own home. You cannot smoke in smoke shops or bars or private clubs even. If you hjave a nurse visit your home because you are sick, you can be fined $50 every time you are caught smoking in your home. I have seen a definite increase in snuff interest. Oh and that ban includes e-cigs too.

Holy sh!t! @thendrix that is terrible. That type of personal intrusion would make any dictator proud! I don’t even smoke cigs anymore, but I don’t like to hear that stuff. I don’t think it is right. Smoking is just the first thing to go. Happy meals have already been outlawed in san francisco! LOL. I always thought that politicians knew better than to take away simple pleasures from average folks? What happened to that? Strange times we are living in…

Other hypocrites with their own addictions and problems (they be damned if WE took away from THEM) sitting around telling US how to live and what to/and what not to do just plain pisses me off. That’s my two cents.

it’s so constant. There is always something people take too far. Guess it’s life.

Though one thing we’d always have going for us is that it’s better then cigs. So we could always use that arguement. It’s also less invasive then cigs which I think is one of the biggest things. Not going to effect your nurses health.

I’ve always been flabergasted by banning of smoking in a smoke shop. What are you doing there if you don’t want smoke?

I don’t think snuff ever will become that popular,atleast here in the US(to much of a smoking and chew culture). If it did somehow get as popular or more popular as ciggs then i wouldn’t be able to afford it,the US would simply tax it like ciggs and chew so it was so expensive that the average person can’t afford it except in limited quantities. To be honest just the fact that nasal snuff is getting talked about on the internet scares me,i wouldn’t put it past our government to start taxing it more just because a few people say they like it.

If snuff became as popular as cigs, then the tobacco/health nazi’s would then complain about the dust from pinching as second hand snuffing.

I don’t think snuff will ever be taxed like cigarettes. If anything I think it’s likely that especialy over a long enough time the tax may go down to encourage it for several reasons.

thendrix65804 this really is a sad thing for us. No smoking at the Brewco, Just for Him, or any other fine establishment. If we vote away eachother’s freedoms like this, soon we won’t have any more. These do-gooders don’t realize the monster they are creating and handing off to our children.

I wonder how many people realize that the “anti-smoking” lobbyists aren’t really just “anti-smoking” but rather full-blown tobacco prohibitionists? They make up health consequences for oral tobacco use all the time, some suggesting it is as dangerous, or MORE dangerous, than smoking. Just last week I saw an article on Huffington Post about smokeless that made exactly those assertions. All tobacco is dangerous, poisonous, and most importantly, immoral, according to these folks. The anti-smoking lobby against e-cigs is good proof of the mentality - it LOOKS like smoking, so it is evil, even if tobacco isn’t involved at all. Even worse, the nicotine comes from tobacco, so that clearly makes it even MORE immoral. They have a great deal of sway in political circles. If snuff was popular (a harm reduction website I saw said nasal snuff was “archaic” and they ignored it because “virtually no one uses snuff nasally”) I am positive it would receive the same negative attention that cigs, chew and even pipe are receiving. If you lived in Canada, you would know that snuff doens’t get any tax breaks compared to cigs. In fact, since they tax cigs individually and loose tobacco by weight, the tax rates are likely HIGHER on snuff, snus etc. You may think that won’t be the case in the US, but if I have learned anything from living next door for over 40 years, it is that the US gladly picks up any tax practice that increases revenue, regardless of “health consequences” rhetoric. That is my incredibly long-winded way of saying I think that if snuff were popular, it would be widely vilified, targeted with extra taxes, and be the subject of multiple laws restricting where you can use it, just like smoking cigarettes. Common sense doesn’t apply when it comes to tobacco products and the government’s response to them.

The mess will hit the fan next year. As part of the tobacco control act, FDA was directed by Congress to establish regulation for “reduced risk” tobacco products. So far they’ve made very little mention of it, but their deadline to approve or ban products starts next year. There have been very major advances in processing chemistry and two very hot reduced risk products are Ariva and Stonewall dissolvables. http://www.dissolvabletobacco.com/ I suggest visiting the above and watching the video. It’s a great concept and very well presented. They are breath-mint like tablets for oral use having extremely reduced TSNA levels, are smoke free, are primarily made of natural ingredients, and have no more risk to third parties than chewing gum (there is no smoke so no second hand smoke). Recently the manufacturer applied with FDA for recognition as a reduced risk product, and FDA *DENIED* the request because it claimed that current regulation doesn’t qualify these as real tobacco products even though they do contain tobacco. The initial result from the press was that Ariva and Stonewall were able to be widely marketed because FDA said they aren’t classified as tobacco products. In a stealthy mode that attracted no media attention, FDA later released an announcement that Ariva and Stonewall are regulated by FDA, but FDA has to decide if they will be regulated like drugs (an almost zero chance of approval) or as a new form of tobacco product (wait for next year to see how this works). From what I hear, this positioning is being done because FDA will disapprove these products which is in effect a full-out ban. The angle they are expected to use is that the products are somewhat harmful and will be very popular so they will harm more people making them a major health-risk and not worthy of approval. What are the real reasons for banning the safest tobacco product available? First, see the above post about tobacco prohibitionists (I agree). Second, big pharmaceuticals own the FDA. They are making a killing (pardon the expression, but it fits) selling gum, patches and other gizmos to smokers displaced by all the bans. Big money means much more to FDA than anything else.

The tax for snuff here in Switzerland is beyond comprehension. No government is going to ignore the tax revenue possibilities if snuff becomes mainstream again.

Eh I don’t see it happening soon maybe in the Uk and Germany, but states with no history of it’s use is unlikely. Nasal snuff has the best public image as far as I can tell though it’s seen as slightly eccentric instead of disgusting. Nasal snuff will be popular in 10 years don’t get me wrong it will have to grow from last I saw 2 million pounds compared to something like 77 million tons of dip. The government won’t notice really for a while since we sniff lower volumes than we dip especially if kids don’t use it and it doesn’t show up in surveys. If the average age isn’t below 30 then it’s not going to be politically contentious, that’s why pipe tobacco, cigars and actual chewing tobacco(not dip), and cigars aren’t contentious and dip and cigarettes are opposed. The Uk is different that’s essentially the only form of smokeless tobacco available it’s socially acceptable and will get more popular as people find out the health difference at which point it will start to face opposition but probably come out ok. Who knows though apparently dip is becoming pretty popular in Germany. 20 percent of youths smoke hookah tobacco which seems like it would lead most logically to pipe tobacco (sweet smelling, perceived as less addictive, etc.). I consider surveys BS there was an anti meth week at my school becuase kids took it as a joke, I’m pretty sure 10 percent don’t smoke meth.