Is The EU Snus Ban A Political Issue?

Since Sweden’s Trade Minister Ewa Bjorling earlier this month called on the European Union to lift its ban on Swedish snus, politicians have become divided on whether the moist tobacco product should be made an issue in European Parliamentary elections, with Swedish candidate Ella Bohlin saying there is no demand to legalize snus from other EU member nations, and a rival candidate Anders Edberg saying there is no evidence that snus is harmful to people’s health. Sweden, which is preparing to take over the rotating EU presidency in July 2009, has been fighting the EU directive that bans the sales of snus in all EU nations except Sweden. The EU ban was introduced in 1992, but Sweden obtained an exemption when it joined the EU in 1995. Some researchers and anti-tobacco activists say snus and some other forms of snuff could help smokers kick the habit. Snus is at least 50% less likely to lead to heart disease compared to cigarettes and unlikely to cause lung cancer, according to an EU committee report. It is steam-cured, so it is said to contain lower concentrations of nitrosamines and other carcinogens compared to other tobacco products. Sweden’s smoking rate is 16%, the lowest in western Europe, according to the World Health Organization (Irish Times 4/21).

I have always been interested in the “Swedish Experience” as it relates to the high prevalence of individuals who use Swedish Snus.  It does makes me wonder why the EU would not remove the ban when the results seem so evident? Is this a political issue? Will it change? What are your thoughts? But let’s look at this from an other point, is this just a classic example that since it’s tobacco it’s evil maybe redundant but isn’t it about time that folks understand that “relative harm of tobacco products”does matter? Is’nt it about time that folks are told the truth rather than tobacco always being a political football? What are your thoughts? Oh, and what are your thoughts on the US future as it relates to Snus?

49 comments ↓

#1 Mr. UNZ on 04.24.09 at 12:53 AM

There is no other way to describe the ban other than political. Swedish Snus is 92% to 98% less harmful than cigarettes yet the EU certainly hasn’t banned cigarettes yet. They talk about it but the smoke and second hand smoke keeps rising.

In addition to being the most reduced harm tobacco product on the planet, Swedish Snus is discreet: there is no spitting; there is no “second-hand snus”; nothing to offend a non-tobacco user. Swedish snus is a win for cigarette smokers as it’s much safer and gives them nicotine and great taste. It’s a win for non-tobacco users as they could be crammed in a crowded bus and not even know the person jammed next to them was using snus…nor would they be in any danger because of it.

The hysteria that provoked the EU Snus Ban in the first place was backed up by 200 year old wives tales like Swedish Snus had glass in it. The reality is the “glass” were salt crystals….salt is used as a preservative in Swedish Snus.

Since Sweden began regulating the production of snus as a Food Product in 1970, it’s developed into the safest form of tobacco available. No oral or throat cancer. No lung cancer. Half the remote possibility of pancreatic cancer than smoking cigarettes. And now we have the 20 and 30 year scientific studies to PROVE the harm reduction advantages of Swedish Snus over all other forms of tobacco; especially cigarettes.

Considering all this, a rational, thinking person can come to no other conclusion that the EU Snus Ban was not only politically motivated, but motivated by the greed of cigarette manufacturers and distributors in the EU who were afraid they would lose major market share to Swedish Snus. The EU cigarette moguls had a right to be afraid: with the stigma and ever-growing restrictions on cigarette smokers, what smoker in their right mind wouldn’t change to Swedish Snus?

Instead the “courageous” EU BANS Swedish Snus and adopts “Smokefree 2040” which pushes the cigarette issue to the next generation to deal with.

Cowards! How many nicotine-addicted EU citizens will die unnecessarily because of the Snus Ban? How many hundreds of billions of Euros will be wasted treating lung cancer and the other deleterious effects of smoking unnecessarily caused by the ban on Swedish Snus?

I’m not even going to go into the enormous amounts of money the cigarette industry lobbyists spend “educating” EU Member Government officials.

And to these EU Member Governments I say this: the blood of every cigarette smoker who has died since your ill-conceived ban on Swedish Snus is on YOUR hands.

As the global economy crumbles, the hundreds of billions if not trillions of Euros spent on smoking-related health care was thrown away by YOU. Imagine how that money could help your countries and citizens today!

And how dare you install punitive trade barriers to Sweden; a fellow EU Member, with impunity! Alcoholism is a major issue in many EU countries. Why isn’t French wine banned? Or Vodka? Or Scotch? Or Gin?

Hypocrites, the lot of you. You know you have no rational reason not to remove the ban on Swedish Snus NOW. Your protests ring hollow and defense of the ban rings false.

Is it you ego’s? Are you that conceited you can’t admit maybe the snus ban was NOT the correct action? How many more smokers have to die; how many more Euros wasted until you have the courage to swallow your pride and revoke the snus ban?

All your ancestors would be ashamed of your actions. You should be too.

#2 Jaybot on 04.29.09 at 5:16 AM

For the record, I actually lived in Eastern Europe for a little over 3 years and was happily Snusing most of the time.

The Ban on Swedish Snus does not make it illegal to carry or even use personally. There is no problem buying it From Sweden and getting it legally through customs and paying whatever small tobacco tax they put on it. The ban simply prohibits sale of Snus commercially within any country in the EU outside of Sweden. Which of course, makes no sense. But I just thought I would mention it is completely legal to buy, own, and use for personal use.

That being said, yes it is all political nonsense. Same worries about dip/chew (which is still actually far safer than smoking cigarettes, but nowhere near as safe snus) in the US but even worse.

#3 Bill Godshall on 04.29.09 at 1:27 PM

Unfortunately for public health, ASH UK and other long time tobacco harm reductionists within the EU public health community have recently switched their policy positions to now oppose snus and even e-cigarettes as less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes.

In Sweden, anti tobacco activists spend more of their resources opposing snus than opposing cigarettes.

Although anti snus activists in Sweden have stopped falsely claiming that it causes oral cancer, and have acknowledged (after years of denials) that 5% of all Swedish males quit smoking by switching to snus, they still adamantly oppose smokers switching to snus.

Abstinence-only extremism and prohibitionism has trumped rationale judgement in the minds of many otherwise reasonable and caring people that work for health agencies and organizations.

Similar obtuseness has inflicted many folks at health agencies and organizations in the US, who are spending more resources advocating bans on the least hazardous tobacco/nicotine products (which prevents smokers from reducing their health risks).

#4 AJ on 05.02.09 at 4:28 PM

The EU snus ban is an “Animal Farm” type of idiocy which languishes in the “WTF” category permanently. Snus is nearly harmless. 16% of Swedes use it, and they all live to be 100 years old. The endless debates among Brussels, Karolinska, and Swedish Match are tiresome, and BAT, JTI, and PMI now all have snus through recent acquisitions. What’s the ‘political’ reason? People used to say PMI, but they’re now in it. Big Pharma? Possibly.

How about lack of interest?

I used to work for Big Tobacco in Sweden, among other places. Snus had its 15 minutes internationally a few years ago, but frankly, European tobacco consumers by and large have no idea what it is, and if it showed up in shops, would either not see it (due to local display/ad bans) or ignore it.

It is a well known pre-conception that Swedish Match has the most to lose (old, uninteresting brands in dull cans). They are now wisely teamed up with PMI in this territory.

Snus brands such as Lucky Strike, Pall Mall and LD are out there to catch smokers of these popular brands who may want to switch, but the cost and logistics of advertising in such a prohibitive environment almost precludes even trying.

Additionally, the rise of snus in Scandinavia has been due mostly to the price differential relative to cigarettes since the mid-90s. In 2005, a pack of Marlboro was 36 SEK, and a can of General was 23 SEK at the corner shop. LD and Granit cost 12-15 SEK. With two years of massive excise hikes, Swedish snus has stopped growing. Low-priced local cigarettes (Level, Corner) are now priced around the same level as snus.

Would the EU member states allow that kind of price differential to get people off of smokes and into snus? No. Would they allow Big Tobacco to advertise snus? Nope. Will EU member states agree on a warning standard across the continent? LOL!

What’s the key to success? Inserts and ‘onserts’ on cigarette packs, plus heavy use of the Internet. Free product to the trade for years to keep the consumer price down. Cigarettes still have pricing power. Use some of that margin to give snus away. Flavors which appeal to cigarette smokers: Heavy menthols and sweeter fruits and chocolate/mocha, which don’t stink (a major issue outside of Sweden & Norway). And, as usual, well-placed press coverage.

The issue is far more complex than the ban in and of itself. And the inertia of the issue at this point in time is due more to lack of a market than some nefarious political scheme. It’s akin to lobbying for decaf espresso in Italy.

#5 jancascade on 05.02.09 at 11:57 PM

There will be no ban. The Cancer Action Network already is planning to tax the hell out of it. They will spend $3 M this year to lobby Congress to tax it, so the anti tobacco parasites of the health charities can continue to live the lifestyle they has become so very comfortable in.

Anti tobacco has never been about health, but about money, the more they can tax the better they live at the expense of the smoking, tobacco using (still legal) public.

#6 Bill Godshall on 05.03.09 at 12:50 PM

jancascade’s statement above is inaccurate and his/her ad hominem criticisms aren’t helpful.

Congress just increased tobacco taxes (for the first time in a decade), and isn’t going to do so again this session.

While CTFK, ACS, ALA, AHA are advocating smokeless tobacco tax hikes in some state legisaltures, CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA have been focussing their federal lobbying activities on the PM/Waxman/Kennedy FDA legislation, which would ban new (and some recently introduced) smokeless products from on the market, prohibit smokeless products from truthfully claiming they are less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, and would enlargen misleading warnings on smokeless that states “This product is not a safe alternative to cigarettes”.

I and other public health advocates have been advocating amending the PM/Waxman/Kennedy legislation with responsible harm reduction provisions, and are advocating that smokeless products be taxed at a lower rate than cigarettes.

#7 Larry Waters on 05.03.09 at 4:17 PM

Regarding Bill Godshall’s remarks above, I do take exception to one point and the mindset which is behind it.

Certain smokeless tobacco products like Swedish/Scandinavian Snus ARE truthfully a less hazardous alternative to cigarettes. The scientific evidence is there, the long-term studies are there, and the living laboratory of Sweden and Norway confirm this.

This does not mean Swedish/Scandinavian Snus is harm-free. It certainly does not mean that non-tobacco users should be encouraged to use any tobacco product…or other deleterious yet legal substance.

It does mean that the 46MM+ cigarette smokers in the United States today do have an alternative which is substantially less dangerous than cigarettes: 92% to 98% less dangerous.

Not every cigarette smoker can or wants to stop using tobacco. The United States Government since the Surgeon General’s report in 1964, chose not to ban cigarettes as they have done with lead paint and asbestos. No, they and the State Governments betrayed American citizens for a $250BB “tobacco settlement” and the cash cow which are the extreme and punitive cigarette taxes of today.

They “claim” this money is intended for smoking cessation programs and anti-smoking education….none of which would have been needed if cigarettes were banned in 1964.

The blood of every single cigarette smoker in the United States since 1964 is on the hands of the US Federal and State Governments.

I too support the professed intent of Waxman/Kennedy. There are too many new products made by Big American Tobacco whose claims are irresponsible; which target especially children (like Camel Orbs), whose ingredients and manufacturing processes are veiled in secrecy, and prove that American Tobacco is an industry which needs government oversight and regulation. The Swedish Government realized that beginning in 1970 when they began regulating Swedish Snus as a Food Product.

The result of that is a win for everyone. Today’s Swedish snus is substantially less harmful than pre-1970’s versions. It’s great for cigarette smokers who can either use it as a tool to give up tobacco altogether or as a much reduced harm replacement which still satisfies their nicotine addiction and enjoyment in using tobacco.

It’s a win for non-tobacco users because Swedish Snus is so completely discreet and it’s a win for the overburdened healthcare system.

The only non-win in the Swedish equation is the one AJ mentioned above: punitive taxation to the point where cigarettes become a viable alternative financially for tobacco users. I hope you keep that in mind as you lobby.

I applaud you statement that smokeless tobacco products be taxed at a lower rate than cigarettes. What I don’t agree with is that Swedish Snus should be dumped in with American Chewing Tobacco (which does cause mouth cancer) and any other tobacco product which does not require combustion.

Not all smokeless tobacco is Reduced Harm or is even intended to be Reduced Harm. Thus my support for oversight by FDA.

As a 35 year nicotine addicted former smoker, I’ve only been completely cigarette free for the last two years because of Swedish Snus.

The intent of Waxman/Kennedy should be an American one: give existing smokers who can’t or don’t wish to quit tobacco a significantly Reduced Harm alternative.

FDA should ensure that there is full disclosure as to ingredients, TSNA levels, and nicotine levels. FDA should ensure safe ingredients and methods are used in the production of products saying they are “Reduced Harm”

Tobacco consumers should be allowed to make an informed decision just as food labeling requirements allow them to do at the grocery store. They may still buy 6 bags of Potato Chips, but at least they can’t say they didn’t know what they were putting in their mouth.
That is how America is supposed to work.

Conversely, FDA control should not be punitive against tobacco users since the US Government gave up that moral authority in 1964.

It is 100% completely accurate to state that Swedish Snus IS a safer alternative to cigarettes: Not to encourage non-tobacco users to begin using Swedish Snus but to provide a considerably safer alternative to existing tobacco users.

If FDA regulation means American “snus” or other tobacco products will become as reduced harm as Swedish Snus, then these American products would be a safer alternative to cigarettes. NOT Safe: Safer.

Meanwhile, lets use some of the tobacco windfall money to enforce existing laws which outright ban and criminalize the sale of any tobacco products to minors. Lets make an example of the convenience store workers who violate those laws instead of ignoring serious enforcement. Let the press put those arrests on the front page.

Making cigarettes less desirable by providing a safer and cost efficient alternative for smokers and ensuring that minors are not using them will ultimately spell the end of cigarette use….not with a bang, but with a whimper. This is still America.

Sincerely,

Larry Waters
aka Mr. UNZ

#8 jancascade on 05.03.09 at 4:54 PM

Bill,
I guess I am a little like Will Rogers, I only know what I read (him newspaper, me online). The Cancer Action Network will spend $3 M lobbying to increase the tax on cigars and smokeless tobacco. I am certain a good deal of this lobbying funding is being funneled through the ACS and RWJF. J&J sells the nitcotine replacement drugs to the tune of $3 B a year. They have convinced government to buy thier drugs via the so called health programs. They will soon be selling government diet and obesity drugs. It is a simple matter of follow the money, I knew the e-cigarettes would have a short shelf life. Too many parasites living off of smokers to allow someone to use a less harmful product that is not taxed.

Daniel E. Smith

This week, Daniel E. Smith, President of the Cancer Action Network which serves as the lobbying arm of the American Cancer Society announced that they would be spending $3 million over “the next few months” to lobby the President’s administration and Congress, specifically for another round of tobacco tax increases, fresh off the heals of the SCHIP taxes.

Smith further announced that this will be the “largest campaign they have ever run to actually achieve a public policy goal.”

#9 AJ on 05.03.09 at 8:37 PM

The fact of the matter is, snus will evolve in Europe on its own despite any decisions made in Brussels.

Anecdotal consumption in Finland is identical to Norway at around 20m cans per year. Much of it is purchased on ferries, and millions of cans flow annually through the Swedish border city of Haparanda.

The effect of the EU ban on Finland is that snus is sold from beneath counters, and by friends to friends. It is not subject to Finland’s own strict laws on tobacco sales, and it has been reported to be favored by Finnish youths, and may act as a ‘bridge’ to smoking. Irony!

After telling the EU that the Finnish island of Aland is independent from the EU ban, Finland was fined. Finnish ferries used to dock there and sell duty-free snus to Finns. Those flags were changed to Swedish ones once the argument was lost.

Now Finland has blamed Sweden for the proliferation of snus in Finland. They can blame the Russians as well, as it’s fairly well known that Vyborg and St. Petersburg, on the other side of Finland, are also major duty-free snus sales points for Finns.

Finland is not a microcosm for the EU. It’s just the most absurd example of the effect of the ban. Swedes buy booze in Denmark, Norwegians buy tobacco and groceries in Sweden, Finns buy snus in Sweden, and cigarettes in Estonia. It’s one big, happy Nordic loop. The difference with snus is that it’s illegal. Tobacco, water, salt, flavor, humectant. Contraband.

The proliferation of Internet shops for snus has now made snus available to all. The sites offer wonderful customer service, and availability of all brands, with manufacturer-sanctioned promotions. Germany has at least one e-commerce site dedicated to snus, Poland has an active forum, and the Brits are active purchasers, among many others.

The product needs to be legalized and made available. It will need several years to become a true mainstream alternative to smokes. It needs breathing room in a currently tobacco-restrictive atmosphere to become known. Allow the brands to get some equity in new markets, and allow these markets to reduce smoking incidences to the Swedish level of 11% from the mid 30’s and low 40’s that are now prevalent in Europe.

Avoid more Finlands.

#10 jancascade on 05.03.09 at 8:44 PM

It is just sad the monied interest will win this one. I think the politicians will ban it to keep the campaign contributions rolling in from anti tobacco.

The message is buy cigarettes or buy big pharma’s drugs, one way or another government will ring money out of smokers! Health? yeah right!

#11 jancascade on 05.03.09 at 10:29 PM

Elected leaders in one Chinese province order public servants to purchase locally made cigarettes to stimulate the economy. Beats taxing them so high it creates a black market that robs government coffers and legal retailers.

http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=d4c8d6be66701210VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=China&s=News

#12 jancascade on 05.03.09 at 11:29 PM

Follow the drug money, J&J, RWJF and the anti tobacco taxpayer rip off.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124139960819782109.html

They are now all over obesity. Very sad for those who fight their weight. Smoker’s can always step outside, fat people cannot step outside their bodies. They will be belittled and blamed for all excessive health care cost.

Of course the drug companies cannot be making too much $$ can they?

#13 History Buff on 05.04.09 at 1:01 AM

As tobacco is IN the same food group as potato, tomato, cauliflower, green pepper, chili’s and other foods AND they ALL contain nicotine … American ingenuity is far from dead.

#14 Larry Waters on 05.04.09 at 1:10 PM

Regarding Bill Godshall’s remarks above, I do take exception to one point and the mindset which is behind it.

Certain smokeless tobacco products like Swedish/Scandinavian Snus ARE truthfully a less hazardous alternative to cigarettes. The scientific evidence is there, the long-term studies are there, and the living laboratory of Sweden and Norway confirm this.

This does not mean Swedish/Scandinavian Snus is harm-free. It certainly does not mean that non-tobacco users should be encouraged to use any tobacco product…or other deleterious yet legal substances.

It does mean that the 46MM+ cigarette smokers in the United States today do have an alternative which is substantially less dangerous than cigarettes: 92% to 98% less dangerous.

Not every cigarette smoker can or wants to stop using tobacco. The United States Government since the Surgeon General’s report in 1964, chose not to ban cigarettes as they have done with lead paint and asbestos. No, they and the State Governments betrayed American citizens for a $250BB “tobacco settlement” and the cash cow which are the extreme and punitive cigarette taxes of today.

They “claim” this money is intended for smoking cessation programs and anti-smoking education….none of which would have been needed if cigarettes were banned in 1964.
The blood of every single cigarette smoker in the United States since 1964 is on the hands of the US Federal and State Governments.

I too support the professed intent of Kennedy/Waxman. There are too many new products made by Big American Tobacco whose claims are irresponsible; which seem to target children instead of
adult cigarettes smokers (like Camel Orbs), whose ingredients and manufacturing processes are veiled
in secrecy, and prove sadly that American Tobacco is an industry which needs government oversight and regulation.
The Swedish Government realized that beginning in 1970 when they began regulating Swedish Snus as a Food Product.

The result of that is a win for everyone. Today’s Swedish snus is substantially less harmful than pre-1970’s versions. It’s great for cigarette smokers who can either use it as a tool to give up tobacco altogether or as a much reduced harm replacement which still satisfies their nicotine addiction and enjoyment in using tobacco.

It’s a win for non-tobacco users because Swedish Snus is so completely discreet and it’s a win for the overburdened healthcare system.

The only non-win in the Swedish equation is the one AJ mentioned above: punitive taxation on
Snus to the point where cigarettes become a viable alternative financially for tobacco users. I hope you keep that in mind as you lobby.

I applaud you statement that smokeless tobacco products be taxed at a lower rate than cigarettes. What I don’t agree with is that Swedish Snus should be dumped in with American Chewing Tobacco (which can cause mouth cancer) and any other tobacco product which does not require combustion.

Not all smokeless tobacco is Reduced Harm or is even intended to be Reduced Harm. Thus my support for oversight by FDA.

As a 35 year nicotine addicted former smoker, I’ve only been completely cigarette free for the last two years because of Swedish Snus.

The intent of Kennedy/Waxman should be an American one: give existing smokers who can’t or don’t wish to quit tobacco a significantly Reduced Harm alternative.

FDA should ensure that there is full disclosure as to ingredients, TSNA levels, and nicotine levels. FDA should ensure safe ingredients and methods are used in the production of products saying they are “Reduced Harm”

Once they have done so, they should remove the requirements of labels stating
“This Product Causes Mouth Cancer”…because it doesn’t. They should also remove
“This Product is not a less hazardous alternative to cigarettes”….because they are.

Tobacco consumers should be allowed to make an informed decision just as food labeling requirements allow them to do at the grocery store. They may still buy 6 bags of Potato Chips, but at least they can’t say they didn’t know what they were putting in their mouth.
That is how America is supposed to work.

Conversely, FDA control should not be punitive against tobacco users since the US Government gave up that moral authority in 1964.

It IS 100% completely accurate to state that Swedish Snus IS a safer alternative to cigarettes: Not to encourage non-tobacco users to begin using Swedish Snus but to provide a considerably safer alternative to existing tobacco users.

If FDA regulation means American “snus” or other tobacco products will become as reduced harm as Swedish Snus, then these American products would be a safer alternative to cigarettes. NOT Safe: Safer.

Perhaps you can also explain how I can walk into a Walmart or Sam’s Club, pick up a giant box of
nicotine gum which contains absolutely no warning labels as to the addictive and cardio-vascular
risks of nicotine? To the contrary: these mini-crates of nicotine gum tout the benefits of using
this product. Nicotine gum is not behind the counter: it is stocked on the public shelves next to
diet food bars. No potential for abuse here; especially by children? Why take the risk of smuggling
illegal drugs into the country when you can just sell children nicotine gum?

Meanwhile, let’s use some of the tobacco windfall money to enforce existing laws which outright ban and criminalize the sale of any tobacco products to minors. Let’s make an example of the convenience store workers who violate those laws instead of ignoring serious enforcement. Let the Press put those arrests on the front page.

Making cigarettes less desirable by providing a safer and cost efficient alternative for smokers and ensuring that minors are not using them will ultimately spell the end of cigarette use….not with a bang, but with a whimper. That’s an American solution and I
Believe this is still America.

Sincerely,

Larry Waters
aka Mr. UNZ

#15 jancascade on 05.06.09 at 1:04 AM

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20090504006119&newsLang=en

I would think it would be a political mine field for a politician to ban a product that could help cigarette smokers cut down or quit tobacco cigarettes.

The message is “smoke, we need the money.” Tobacco control has been working to stop the use of tobacco for forty years and they have an opportunity and many of them want to ban the e-cigarette? I hope they lose this round!

#16 AJ on 05.07.09 at 3:45 PM

New York State has been proffering up its ‘free patch and gum’ program on local TV in NYC all month. It’s one of the more blatant ‘addiction bridge’ strategies I have ever seen, and the couching of the program in a PSA is disturbing. The State is offering lab-created nicotine free of charge to cigarette consumers, just enough to get them out to the CVS for more in a few days.

The cruel irony of pharmaceutical cessation products is that they do not deliver nicotine in a way which satsisfies a smoker’s cravings.

As any good tobacco R&D guy will tell you, Both cigarettes and oral/nasal tobacco deliver a ‘hit’ of nic, which gradually decreases during consumption. The ‘hit’ is what puts down the jones, and is integral to what was once called “pure smoking satisfaction.’

Pharmaceutical products deliver a constant low level of nicotine orally or cutaneously, but never quite deliver what the consumer is craving. The result is a high fail rate, and a constant return to these products.

Which is the point.

Nicorette’s marketeers have devised a 12-week program which requires heavy use of their gum products. Craving gotcha? Have two pieces at once! The gums are now packaged in sexy flavors, with teeth-whitening ability. Gum is becoming a lifestyle choice. A consumer good which Glaxo SmithKline is hoping you’ll use forever.

GSK and their ilk also look at under-age smokers as future consumers. You won’t find a “don’t start smoking” link on their web-pages.

Snus is THE product which offers the ‘hit,’ and the chance to be smoke-free and healthy without compromising on enjoyment. In Sweden, 11% smoke, and 16% snus. Sweden has the lowest rates of lung, and pancreatic cancer in Europe, and I personally know many who quit smoking with snus. Now they’re addicted to snus, but they could have been addicted to gum instead.

When a multinational pharma company creates an addictive product in its labs, it is meant to get consumers addicted. The marketing campaigns use guilt to lure you in, and lifestyle (‘cinnamon blast!’) to keep you. Unfortunately, ‘big pharma’ has the power to tell you that their lab-created nicotine delivery system is a fun and effective way to stop smoking,whereas Big Tobacco must remain silent about snus.

#17 butthead on 05.07.09 at 8:29 PM

Wow great info. I just love this info.

#18 Jaybot on 05.07.09 at 8:48 PM

Geez, thats a lot of comments, I alredy forgot what I was going to say after reading most of it. But the lack of interest mentioned by AJ above can’t be entirely true since american tobacco companies including RJR and PM now how a big stake in it and are advertising their ‘snus’ products all over the states. Which not only shows that the big tobacco companies are interested but also, in my opinion, just raises snus interest/curiousity/awareness.

#19 AJ on 05.07.09 at 9:35 PM

Jaybot:

The article is not about the States. It’s about the EU.

#20 LD mini snus | Snus Recensioner on 05.14.09 at 1:20 PM

[…] Is The EU Snus Ban A Political Issue? | TobaccoToday […]

#21 OTP Kid on 06.03.09 at 3:02 PM

Has anyone heard about the recent introduction of Sausage SNU’s? At first I thought it was a joke, but then a colleague of mine from Poland told me that these things are selling really well. You put the sausage piece (which looks like a miniturized football) in between your cheek and gum and the spices and oils somehow quench one’s desire for nicotine. He said the name of the product is Sausnus.

#22 Jaybot on 06.03.09 at 3:16 PM

AJ:

True.

But now that big tobacco in the states has jumped on it, I believe it has the potential to become much more recognized and raise interest internationally, including the rest of the EU.

#23 OTP Kid on 06.04.09 at 11:00 AM

Addiotnal information on the Sausnus: available in 3 different flavors, hot, mild and pickled. 10 pieces per “tin”. Already regulated by FDA, so no issue there as far as the Kennedy bill is concerned. Each piece is sealed in plastic, so they do NOY need to be refrigerated like the Camel SNU’s. Not sure about the validity of this, but Star Scientific is working on a fat free version.

#24 Desert Dude on 06.05.09 at 12:48 AM

always has to be a clown out there. OTP Kid You typically have some very insightful comments. What’s gone on having a bad day since the excise tax or is it fda regulation that’s got you going comical?

#25 OTP Kid on 06.08.09 at 11:44 AM

Desert Dude: I wasn’t having a bad day, SCHIP is just another hurdle in the tobacco marathon. Anyway, with all due respect, you’re missing my point. I have said all along that SNU’s and the entire concept of tobacco companies selling harm reduction ( see previous posts )will never see the light of day and that it’s a fantasy the manufacturers have concocted. The SAUSNU’s is a satirical way to illuminate how prepostorous the idea is. It’s easy to see how quickly this is devolving: orbs, sticks, etc. What’s next, the nicotine Camel lollipop or Starburst like menthol chewies??

Anyway, I hope you see the point. I would have rather got a dialogue going on SASNUS and let everyone have alittle fun, but since my post is being misinterpreted, I guess we have to forego the fun for now and spell it out clearly.

#26 AJ on 06.08.09 at 1:14 PM

OTP Kid:

The “fantasy” has reduced smoking incidences in Sweden to 11% over a few decades.

And it’s truly only Swedish Match that is “fantasizing” about this, as they do not manufacture or sell cigarettes. They’ve witnessed the phenomenon first hand. And the Swedes have drunk the Kool-Aid, and are benefiting from it.

In the US, it’s becoming clear that harm reduction is not the goal of Big Tobacco. Snus products like Camel and Marlboro are meant to give smokers a nicotine alternative for times when cigarette smoking is not an option (bars, planes, office, etc.).

I’d agree that the orbs and sticks are a bit over the top, but a cigarette company certainly wants you to keep smoking. With increasing restrictions and super-high prices in some localities, they inevitably see a reduction in sticks consumed per day.

The phenomenon of homegrown snus websites and forums has brought together many former smokers who are grateful that they found snus. It’s just a shame that it’s up to the consumer to find out about the product him/herself.

#27 OTP Kid on 06.08.09 at 2:23 PM

AJ: the fantasy is that government or Tobacco Free Kids is about quitting smoking, it’s about the elimination of tobacco. Can I be any more clear?

#28 AJ on 06.08.09 at 6:25 PM

OTP Kid:

No you cannot. Because your statement has little merit.

Philip Morris is just as much a part of the new US legislation as The government and TFK.

Taking into account the money that cigarettes bring to state coffers every day, it will never be banned.

The EU’s regulations are far stricter than what will happen if Kennedy/Waxman is passed in the senate: Not only is outdoor advertising banned, but max tar and nic levels are mandated by law. Ads in the press are generally banned, and some countries are moving toward full under-the-counter sales (Finland, Norway).

With Philip Morris so involved in the US legislation, certain marketing privileges are retained, and FDA regulation only serves, ironically, to put a US ‘stamp of approval’ on smokes. Quite brilliant, actually. Tobacco is alive and well.

#29 Desert Dude on 06.08.09 at 6:36 PM

AJ – You are misspoken also as Tobacco is NOT alive and well by no means. In PM’s world it is pretty rosy at the expense of the other players. So it is would be more apparent that it will be put on a respirator with the off switch being taped over a few times, once by TFK, FDA, UNCLE SAM and PM!

#30 AJ on 06.08.09 at 9:26 PM

Desert Dude

Who will suffer? Big Tobacco has consolidated itself globally in a big way. Altria owns UST, Imperial owns Reemtsma and Altadis + 50% of Habanos, as well as Commonwealth in the US (USA Gold). JTI gobbled up Gallaher, and BAT, with its stake in RJR (Who owns Conwood), is doing extremely well. RJR as a group is strong in itself. Lorillard lives on through Newport. After STK, Swedish Match remains the last fish in the pond to be eaten.

These larger agglomerations have much more power over cost for NTM’s and tobacco. Ad bans allow them to funnel M&A money into discounts which allow them to keep their premium strategic portfolios accessible, while also making mid-price and value brands available in markets where excise taxes haven’t squeezed the segments together.

There are also chaotic parts of the world which remain growth engines: Eastern Europe and Russia have uptraded from cheap local brands to international mid-price and premium (and super-premium) in the last 15 years. PMI is developing Indonesia after its recent acquisition of Sampoerna, and eyes continue to be focused on an easing of restrictions in India and China (the 1 trillion stick golden goose).

The USA has 46 million smokers who are eligible voters, and has a 1 billion can per year (growing) smokeless market. No chance of that being turned off anytime soon. Kennedy/Waxman almost guarantees it.

#31 OTP Kid on 06.09.09 at 10:02 AM

AJ: You are trying to change the course of the original discussion, basdically in order to make your points without actually addressing the original topic. The main point is that SNU’s will never be allowed to be marketed as harm reduction, and the tobacco companies will not be allowed to market alternative delivery systems such as orbs, sticks, and whatever else they come up with. These will all be painted as “gateway” products and thus banned, and harm reduction will not be allowed to be spoken as it will be painted as encouraging tobacco use. And even if that wasn’t the case, the manufacturers will NEVER allow themselves to be made that vulnerable to lawsuits.

Your statement on RJR being strong as a group itself tells me you don’t know what you’re talking about, and I’m pretty sure you’ve got some other agenda. In the meantime, I would encourage you to get into SAUSNUS, it’s the future baby!

#32 Larry Waters on 06.09.09 at 11:38 AM

To OTP Kid – So what you are saying in your response to AJ is that the facts don’t matter at all; politics, lawyers, and political correctness are all that matter.

Sadly, the reality is you may be correct. The “Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act” does neither and encourages continued and new cigarette use.

The indisputable FACT that snus (not snu’s) is at least 98% less harmful to a smoker than cigarettes is just that: a scientifically proven Fact.

You and the other anti-all-tobacco extremists can ignore this fact and others: most agenda-driven extremists of any type never let the truth distract them from their “feelings”, “beliefs”, and world-view.

The truth is millions of current and future cigarette smokers will die unnecessarily while stressing the health care system to the tune of $BB….all because in YOUR world-view, all tobacco must be eliminated, all nicotine must be eliminated, and damn anyone who disagrees or suffers because of you.

You’re no better than the terrorists cited as the justification for the anti-tobacco PACT Act; also working it’s way through Congress.

When you’re ready to accept the Truth, then we can work together on our joint desire for a cigarette-free America.

Unfortunately, while I support the factual and logical way for cigarettes to “die on the vine”, you are intent on burning down the vineyard, the fields, and the towns surrounding them.

Don’t bother responding. I’m unsubscribing from this thread. It’s becoming repetitious: you and your kind ignore the facts, the facts are again presented, you ignore them again.

This isn’t a dialog: it’s the Truth on one side and your Extremist Rhetoric on the other, talking AT each other; not TO each other.

Hope you don’t oppose intellectual laziness since that’s apparently the only tool in your arsenal.

By the way, SAUSNUS wasn’t satire, wasn’t clever, made no point, and was a waste of everyone’s time. In order for satire to be effective, everyone has to GET it; not have it explained to them after the fact.

Intellectual laziness, blind extremism, and a moronic smugness…it’s your present and future, baby!

#33 OTP Kid on 06.09.09 at 4:48 PM

Larry Waters: Doon’t be a hater because you didn’t pick up on the satire. Good luck to you in the future, and watch out for those flying pigs, I suspect they hurt if they hit you!

#34 OTP Kid on 06.09.09 at 4:52 PM

For the record, Larry Waters is also Mr. Unz and has an agenda for SNU”””””s. His comments are more advertising for something he has an interest in, see his blog, so I while anyone can disagree with me, I believe he has an obligation to full disclosure, which he chooses to conveniently ignore.

#35 AJ on 06.09.09 at 6:02 PM

OTP Kid:

Snus has been available on the US market for almost 15 years, and is considered as “moist snuff” along with dip. It comprises an infinitesmal part of the US 1 billion can market, now mostly owned by PMUSA. Moist snuff, either in loose or portion form, is not going anywhere.

#36 OTP Kid on 06.09.09 at 6:51 PM

AJ: I’m pretty sure I never mentioned moist snuff, so try and stay on topic please.

I know, you’ll refer to harm reduction, but we are talking about SNU””s. See string header for reference please.

#37 Larry Waters on 06.09.09 at 7:01 PM

Oh, please. I list my website in the leave a comment form. Larry Waters, Mr. UNZ…what does it matter?

I’ve been a pro reduced harm tobacco proponent ever since I was able to break a 35 year 2 pack a day cigarette addiction by switching to Swedish Snus.

My site is an informational one to help others learn about reduced harm and hopefully be able to give up cigarettes like I did.

There’s my full disclosure. Now why don’t you go do something meaningful with your life?

#38 Larry Waters on 06.09.09 at 7:05 PM

As long as I’m here, NO ONE picked up on your failed attempt at satire. That’s why you had to explain it.

THIS is how you use absurdity to make a point.

By Paul Smalera
The Big Money / Reuters
Mon Jun 8, 2009
http://www.reuters.com/article/bigMoney/idUS196848407620090608?sp=true

And in the interests of full disclosure, I don’t know Paul Smalera and don’t take any money or give any money to Reuters.

Read and learn, baby!

#39 Larry Waters on 06.09.09 at 7:09 PM

There you go again, OTB: what is a flying pig? I don’t get it. Does anyone here?

Speaking of hate, why do you hate and wish death on the 46MM American nicotine-addicted cigarette smokers?

I don’t know how the emails of your inane comments made it to me, but I have ensured I’ve canceled my subscription to this thread, so go talk to yourself, baby!

#40 OTP Kid on 06.09.09 at 7:15 PM

didn’t you already threaten us once you were leaving the thread? Everyone gets the flying pig, unless your not from here, which is pretty obvious at this point.

SAUSNUS!!!

#41 Desert Dude on 06.15.09 at 7:19 PM

Larry – I love the rhetoric. Keep it up! The OTP kid is just a big wiener! Keep Snussing it up!

#42 OTP Kid on 07.13.09 at 2:04 PM

Desert Dude – I would prefer you say I’m being a big Sausage instead of wiener so as to keep the lexicon proper. Unless you meant Whiner of course, and then we know you can’t spell.

#43 Desert Dude on 07.14.09 at 2:27 AM

Ok so your a whiner also!

#44 OTP Kid on 07.14.09 at 4:06 PM

That’s better DD

#45 Atakan B on 01.23.10 at 5:57 AM

ATT: AJ,

Your comments are app. a year old but still valid and very interesting to me. Do you still read this blog? Anyway to get a hold of you? Lunch? Anyone else who might know?

Atakan B, snus user, entrepreneur and smoker, Stockholm, Sweden.

#46 AJ on 01.23.10 at 7:07 AM

Atakan B:

I left Sweden almost two years ago, and am now based in St. Petersburg, Russia. You can find me on http://www.snuscentral.org where I blog under my real name, Andrew Romeo.

#47 Gragreeleta on 04.24.10 at 3:51 AM

им оставалось. мама сосёт Даша проститутка веревку на ее шею. групповуха геев порно видео к нам и принялась скакать вокруг виляя остальным телом от радости при виде палача. сексуальные стрижки Форум проститутка в одинцово Начальник конвоя поднял трость и смотреть сперма во влагалище

Все готовы старый надзиратель в порево для подростков Проститутки москвы метро преображенского Был человек с слабым голосом мега ххх Сдерживаемый крик. анальный фистинг мужчине Киров кировская область проститутки его за плечи его он шагнул чуть в сторону огибая лужу на дороге. лизание попки

Сдерживаемый крик. голые девушки из ростова на Хотелось петь, бежать, смеяться. супружеский секс Случайно подняв голову он взмахнул
массивные стены желтоватый гравий и на темные стены все мозг понимал, предвидел, размышлял даже о лужах. секс в sims3 Фото анкеты проституток москвы Потом на осужденного набросили петлю лорно ххх Ни странно другой минуты но порево безплатно скачать Сколько стоят проститутки И все прочие следовали чуть. гей вечеринки известно ни во дворе появилась собака. самые волосатые пизды штыками медленно остальные надевали наручники на осужденного, пропускали цепь через них цепь часто прикрепляли к своим поясам и туго вдоль бедер.

#48 Jeremycal on 06.19.16 at 7:14 AM

выездной мобильный шиномонтаж одинцово – горячая вулканизация, ремонт дисков в Москве.

#49 WilliamJand on 06.21.16 at 6:32 AM

Стоимость услуг Шиномонтажа – Передвижной Шиномонтаж в садоводстве Моторное, Передвижной Шиномонтаж в коттеджном поселке Лехтуси.

Leave a Comment