The manufacturing process of snus differs from that of other oral tobacco products. Snus tobacco is heated and pasteurized rather than cured or fermented, resulting in a less harmful product which contains a lower concentration of TSNA carcinogens in comparison to other traditional tobacco products.[2] Though research on the connection between snus and disease such as cancer is not conclusive, no associations between snus consumption and an increased risk of cancer have been found.[3]
The warning text “causes cancer” was removed from snus packaging in Sweden and other countries because current scientific evidence indicates that the cancer risk associated with snus is significantly lower than that of smoking. The shift in labeling aims to provide accurate information while still cautioning consumers about potential health concerns.
Nicotine products in general have been linked to reproductive harms such as stillbirth, premature birth, and low birth weight.[4] Conversely, non-tobacco-based nicotine pouches (also known as “nic pouches”) are classified as non-carcinogenic[5][6][7] since nicotine itself is not a carcinogen. However, they are still harmful to cardiovascular health due to their nicotine content, and are associated with moderately higher risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke, and reproductive harms.[8][9] The main causes for mortality from smoking including cardiovascular disease from the effects of smoke on vascular coagulation and blood vessel walls are not caused primarily by nicotine and hence not to be considered equal to the moderate cardiovascular health risks from nicotine pouches.[10]
Mine just says “This product contains nicotine and is highly addictive”.
Death by snus
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4553893/
Thus, although the level of NNK in the Swedish snus is much lower than in the old type of snuff and in cigarette smoke (16), the level of total NNAL (a NNK metabolite) in urine from users of Swedish snus is still considerable, and only reduced to about half of that found in smokers and in users of old type snuff (Table 1).
Increased risks of cancer-specific death were observed both among exclusive smokers (HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.10–1.21) and never-smoking snus users (HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05–1.26).
Exclusive snus users also had increased risks for both prostate cancer mortality (HR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.03–1.49) and total mortality (HR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.04–1.37). The authors concluded that the results suggest that nicotine may promote cancer progression independent of the combustion products of tobacco smoke.
huh? they still have those warnings. there’s no source for that paragraph.
Yeah, the only source I can find for something like this is aside from dense academic papers I’m not qualified to read is https://www.swedishmatch.com/Snus-and-health/Research-on-snus/Cancer/
Which is… uh, not exactly a reliably source on the topic since they’re a Swedish company that makes Snus. And they don’t even mention that Sweden has removed the warnings.
That part of the page was added by some anonymous user- it just lists an IP, not a username- on October 9th. So I’m gonna go with not believing this one unless a Swedish person pops up to confirm.
There are other downsides to snus apart from cancer so they still have warnings. They just don’t mention cancer anymore.
i’m not arguing for or against the health warnings, i’m simply saying that the packages still have them, last i checked which was this week.
All I can say is that a peer reviewed medical journal in 2020 said there was no cancer warning. That doesn’t mean there aren’t other health warnings or that it hasn’t changed since 2020. But I doubt they’re lying about it.
i mean the authors don’t control whether the labels are on there to begin with. that’s down to regulation.
I think they meant that in Sweden they removed the cancer labels? Here in the States (California specifically) at least, General Snus (made by Match) simply has the warning “may cause mouth cancer.” Camel Snus on the other hand has no cancer warning at all just “may cause gum disease and tooth loss.”
Like you said regulation is the final say in whether it’s on the label or not but these two warnings seem like the States (again at least CA) are taking the harm reduction into consideration as the labels aren’t as severe as they are on dip or cigarettes. Sorry if this is incoherent I’m typing on a phone while being talked at by a toddler who says he’s seen bigfoot.
i haven’t seen a package close up in a while, i’ve only seen them behind the counter, but they usually have a huge white sticker over half of it that says “TOBAK SKADAR DIN HÄLSA ALLVARLIGT”, or “tobacco is seriously damaging to your health”. the cancer thing may be in the fine print but the stickers looked the same.
deleted by creator
It makes sense, digestive system is way better at filtering harmful chemicals than lungs.
Oh definitely, lungs are delicate little things. You can get cancer or other chronic diseases from breathing pretty much anything.
I do have questions about the effect on your mouth though and prevalence of mouth and throat cancer. I’d be interested in a better study on that.
I had heard as a child that chewing tobacco added abrasives to cut open your mouth and that that was part of the cancer question. Not sure if that is a myth though.
It used to, not these days.
