6th July 2010. Reducing the toll of smoking-related disease and death: The case for tobacco harm reduction The rationale for establishing low-toxicity smokeless nicotine product policies: Why are the pros stronger than the cons? Lars Ramstrom Institute for Tobacco Studies, Sweden.
Reducing the toll of smoking-related disease and death: The case for tobacco harm reductionThe rationale for establishing low-toxicity smokeless nicotine product policies: Why are the pros stronger than the cons?Lars RamstromInstitute for Tobacco Studies, Sweden
But,”Tobacco Harm Reduction”is a controversial issue.
”Low-tar” cigarettes are no candidates forharm reduction,
but some ”low-toxicity” smokeless tobacco products are.
One such product, Swedish SNUS, is dominating the debate on Tobacco Harm Reduction.
Opponents of Tobacco Harm Reductiongenerally agree that switching to Snus can yield substantial reduction of tobacco-induced diseases for thoseINDIVIDUALSwho do thereby abstain from cigarettes,
Is there a risk that snus serves as a gateway to smoking and thereby increases smoking?
snus becomes an additional use rather than a replacement?
nicotine addiction is strengthened by snus use?
snus is ineffektive as cessation aid?
snus use will weaken smokers’ effort to quit smoking?
Remaining ”secondary” smokers: 0.7% of all men
Starting to smoke after onset of snus use is a very rare option − and most of those cases, 76%, end up by quitting smoking.
Continuing daily dual users are a minority (12%) of all dual initiators and constitute just 1.8% of all men.
About a third of smokers who start snus use do subsequently quit all daily use of nicotine. This is not compatible with the idea that snus use were strengthening nicotine addiction.