Zero vs the anti-tobacco lobby - Snus in Canada

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • The Cook
    Member
    • Aug 2007
    • 166

    Zero vs the anti-tobacco lobby - Snus in Canada

    This is a letter that Zero wrote the other day to the Edmonton Journal. Snus is being introduced to Canada (testing now in Edmonton) and already the anti-tobacco lobby is complaining. Give me a break...

    Anyhow, here's the letter:

    To the Editor,

    I write in response to the criticisms voiced by Dr. Els, Dr. Campbell, and Robert Walsh [big guns in the anti-tobacco lobby] with respect to Imperial Tobacco's test marketing of a new smokeless tobacco product in Edmonton. To first disclose my interests, or lack thereof, I make note that I am not, nor have I ever been, employed by or have ever held any financial interests in any tobacco-related industry. I write this letter as a scientist with the intention of hopefully informing the Canadian public on this issue.

    Let me first say that I abhor smoking. The list of evils one can associate with this activity is long and well known. I have lost family to smoking related cancer and would wish such suffering on no human being. That said, I feel compelled to point out the misinformation and lack of information contained in Dr. Els' letter. I would really expect a physician to be better informed on the matter.

    The first key point which must be raised is the fundamental hazards as relates to tobacco. Nicotine, according to the available medical literature, is not in and of itself a known carcinogen. It is an alkaloid, a broad family of chemicals which contains things like caffeine, codeine, quinine, and many others. The carcinogenic properties of cigarettes derive largely from its means of delivery - namely, cigarette smoke.

    Popular North American oral tobacco products like Skoal and Copenhagen are also known to be carcinogenic, contributing primarily to cancers of the gastrointestinal system. In these cases it is the processing of the tobacco which produces the carcinogens. These types of oral tobacco product are cured or fermented, a process which alters the flavour of the tobacco, but also gives rise to the production of a family of chemicals known as Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines (TSNAs). It is these chemicals which are dangerous to human health.

    The new product being introduced by Imperial Tobacco, snus, is of Scandinavian origin. Produced primarily in Sweden, snus processing is entirely different to tobacco products we are familiar with in North America. Snus is produced using a pasteurization process which results in dramatically lower levels of TSNAs in the finished product. This secret has been long known to the Swedes who, despite having a similar level of tobacco consumption per capita as the rest of Europe, has much lower levels of tobacco-related disease. The Swedish medical community has studied snus for many years now and have found little if any significant correlation between the use of snus and an increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal cancers. This is a dramatically safer tobacco product than anything North Americans are used to seeing.

    Dr. Els suggests that there is little evidence that snus would help smokers quit, but there is a wealth of evidence in Sweden to suggest otherwise. Among adult males, Sweden has Europe's highest per-capita consumption of smokeless tobacco (in the form of snus), the lowest cigarette consumption, lowest lung cancer mortality rate, is among the lowest for oral cancer mortality, and has the lowest percentage of smoking-related deaths in the developed world. A substantial peer-reviewed body of medical literature supports the conclusion that snus is directly responsible for this outstanding health record.

    I think we have simply heard for so many years that tobacco in all its forms is evil that we have perhaps closed our minds to the possibility that this statement may not be correct. I implore Dr. Els and his colleagues to properly research the issue before making blanket statements which are demonstrably incorrect. Subjectively, I know a great deal of people, myself included, who have quit smoking by switching to snus with little to no effort. More than just quitting, the overwhelming majority of people I have met who have switched to snus find it to be such an appealing product that they greatly prefer it over smoking and have shown no desire whatsoever to go back to cigarettes. The Swedish statistics seem to support this view.

    The reality of the situation is that no effort of government, lobbyists, health professionals, or any other group or product in any country has been as successful in helping people quit smoking and reducing the incidence of deadly cancers as snus has done in Sweden. Certainly it is not an entirely harmless product, but neither is a cup of coffee. I think we have to direct our concerns logically in this instance, and to ignore the potential for snus to bring about real, positive change in the health of tobacco consuming Canadians is undeniable. Quitting tobacco use altogether is certainly preferable, but arguing that harm-reduction is not a viable solution is no different than arguing against condoms in favour of abstinence. It is naive and simply unrealistic. To pass up this incredible opportunity in an illogical and reactionary adherence to an outdated ideology does a disservice to Canadian smokers everywhere.

    In closing, it remains to be seen whether Imperial Tobacco's product will uphold the high standards set by its Swedish counterparts. I would implore the Canadian medical community to perform their own studies and to press the tobacco companies to make their products as safe as possible. With cigarettes this was simply not possible, but with snus there is a real opportunity for the medical community to offer a positive contribution to making these products safer.
  • darkwing
    Member
    • Oct 2007
    • 415

    #2
    Gorgeous. Certainly it is time someone put the antitobacco zealots in their place in Canada. Meanwhile let's hope the Edmonton test marketing proves promising and we can later buy snus at corner stores across the country.

    Comment

    • Zero
      Member
      • May 2006
      • 1522

      #3
      :lol: man, I wrote this in the middle of the night and it shows... the grammar is atrocious - d'oh!

      Comment

      • Craig de Tering
        Member
        • Nov 2006
        • 525

        #4
        Awesome dude!
        I hope they print it or put it online or both.

        Comment

        • darkwing
          Member
          • Oct 2007
          • 415

          #5
          Globe and Mail Column Slams Snus

          We need more tobacco like a hole in the head
          ANDRE PICARD

          From Thursday's Globe and Mail

          E-mail Andre Picard | Read Bio | Latest Columns
          October 4, 2007 at 9:20 AM EDT

          Add to the list of "innovations" the world does not need: smokeless, chewless and spitless tobacco.

          Snus (rhymes with moose) is currently being test-marketed by Imperial Tobacco in Edmonton. It's sold in about 230 retail outlets in the city, under the brand name du Maurier. Look for it in the fridge, near the Red Bull.

          Snus, or Swedish snuff, is a moist powder tobacco product packaged in miniature tea bags. The bags are placed between the teeth and upper lip and held there for minutes or hours, while they slowly release nicotine.

          Because snus is not fire-cured like traditional tobacco, and not burned and inhaled like cigarettes, it is being touted as a safer alternative to smoking.

          "We believe the responsible position is to seek out and offer products that may substantially reduce health risks. Harm reduction is what any responsible company strives to do," Benjamin Kemball, president and chief executive officer of Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd., told the Edmonton Sun.

          That's pretty rich coming from a corporation whose bottom line depends on the inveterate peddling of poison and the promotion of lifelong addiction to its brands.

          It's also eerily reminiscent of the unmitigated nonsense tobacco companies used to utter about "light" and "mild" cigarettes. These terms, of course, were designed to deceptively suggest that those cigarettes were somehow safer. They were not, and the terminology has effectively been banned.

          Snus is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a healthy product. To suggest that it is an effective harm-reduction tool is a perversion of the principle, though some argument can be made that snus may provide a slight benefit to people so addicted to tobacco that they are unable to quit smoking. But so is nicotine gum.

          Mr. Kemball told the Edmonton Journal that "there seems to be pretty compelling evidence that this product is significantly less risky."

          It is true that snus contains fewer nitrosamines - carcinogenic agents that cause mouth cancer - than traditional snuff does. It is true that because there is no combustion and inhalation, snus does not cause lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease the way smoking does. Nor do users exhale secondhand smoke or spit out gobs of chewing tobacco.

          It is true too that snus users have higher rates of pancreatic cancer. And that snus contains far more addictive nicotine than cigarettes do.

          In other words, stuffing steam-cured tobacco bags in your mouth is "healthier" than chewing on fermented tobacco (traditional American snuff) or sticking a flaming stick of tobacco in your mouth and inhaling.

          That's a lot like saying being hit by a car hurts less than being hit by a big rig or a train.

          Mr. Kemball made much of the Swedish example. Sweden has the highest rate of snus use in the world - for historical reasons. It was also the first European country to bring its smoking rate below 20 per cent, and it has the lowest rate of lung cancer in the world. "The facts speak for themselves," Mr. Kemball said.

          Do they really? To suggest that lower rates of smoking and cancer are primarily the result of snus use is quite a stretch.

          Of course, you don't hear tobacco companies trumpeting Sweden's punishingly high tobacco taxes, its elaborate anti-smoking campaigns or its workplace safety rules that reduce both smoking and exposure to other carcinogens.

          Unlike Sweden (and Norway), Canada does not have a tradition of snus use. Nor does it need one.

          Canada has 4.5 million smokers, and about 80 per cent of them are addicted to nicotine. The widespread availability of snus would create more nicotine addicts, and provide a marginal benefit to smokers.

          Despite the whitewashing and the soft-peddling by Imperial Tobacco, the reality is that snus is not designed to replace cigarette sales, but as an add-on.

          Smokers will likely stuff these little nicotine-laced bags in their mouths when they are craving a smoke and it's too cold to go outside, or when they are in public places where there are smoking restrictions.

          If smokers are looking to quit, there are many proven methods. This isn't one of them.

          Snus is not a smoking cessation aide, it's a smoking prolongation aide.

          It's also a fairly blatant method of recruiting young people to tobacco. Sell them this seemingly innocuous product that tastes good and provides a nicotine buzz, and in no time they will be lighting up.

          That snus is even being allowed on the Canadian market demonstrates the absurdity of the federal Hazardous Products Act, a consumer protection law that features a clause preventing the government from prohibiting tobacco products.

          Change the law. Snuff out snus.

          apicard@globeandmail.com

          New Feature: Recommend this article to other Globe readers!

          Recommend this article? 12 votes


          View the most recommended

          Print E-mail Comments (7) Share License

          Comment

          • darkwing
            Member
            • Oct 2007
            • 415

            #6
            We should all write to Mr. Picard at the Globe and Mail about this. I have submitted a comment to the forum attached to the article.

            Comment

            • chainsnuser
              Senior Member
              • Jan 2007
              • 1388

              #7
              We need more Andre Picard - columns like a hole in the head.

              It's always disgusting for me to read such nonsense. At least he hasn't got the courage to write a complete 'horror-story'. A few informations are actually true, but, of course, misleadingly presented. I wonder, if dishonest anti-tobacco-propaganda ist still fully covered by the freedom of speech or if some of these full-time-anti-tobacco-zealots already fear to get sued, sooner or later.

              Cheers!

              Comment

              • The Cook
                Member
                • Aug 2007
                • 166

                #8
                Mr. Picard's column is the harshest criticism of snus that I've ever read. This guy is so far removed from reality that it's frightening. If only he knew how many people have quit cigarettes for snus, he might be impressed. Probably not, he sounds like a spokesman for the anti-tobacco lobby.

                Comment

                • darkwing
                  Member
                  • Oct 2007
                  • 415

                  #9
                  The editorial in the latest issue of the medical journal The Lancet discusses tobacco harm reduction and says good things about snus, as do several articles and letters to that issue of the journal. Wanted to post them here but only have a pdf version and cannot cut and paste.

                  Comment

                  • Xobeloot
                    Member
                    • Jan 2008
                    • 2542

                    #10
                    I just found this last night. Figured I would bump it back to the 1st page.

                    Great letter Zero!

                    ~Xobe

                    Comment

                    • snoosiphant
                      Member
                      • Feb 2008
                      • 175

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Zero
                      :lol: man, I wrote this in the middle of the night and it shows... the grammar is atrocious - d'oh!
                      Beautiful letter. Score one for our side I didnt notice any grammar problems, people read for meaning and it seemed well thought out.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X