- NEW!
Help answer this question below.
Heh, I don't think so. It's probably about 95% less satisfying too.
http://www.quittobacco.com/facts/effects.htm
Smokeless tobacco sounds good, but the chewing in the mouth elevates the risk of aquiring mouth cancer. Please, see the link.
Why exchange one risk in favor of another? Is mouth cancer better than lung cancer? Why not quit cold turkey?
Probably not, Suby. There are a lot of smokeless tobacco products already available. They do not appeal to smokers. I was a smoker for years. I understand the reasons they like tobacco and smoking. I could be tempted again, myself. I enjoyed every single smoke and pipe. And I am not a 'fussy' non-smoker. It does not bother me. Anyone can sit at my table and smoke.
I am not a smoker, however, instinct tells me that many smokers would not be willing to switch to smokeless tobacco because I don't think it would be quite as effective.
yes sure we do....
Here is an extract copied from the statement by Dr. Jonathan Foulds, MA, MAppSci, PhD
Sunday, June 14, 2009
.
' I was recently invited to speak at the Virginia Youth Tobacco Program’s Annual Conference in Richmond, Virginia. My topic was whether snus (smokeless tobacco) might help some smokers to quit smoking. Drs Thomas Eissenberg (Victoria Commonwealth University) and Dr Lois Beiner (University of Massachusetts) also gave presentations in the same session on the topic of smokeless tobacco (and particularly snus). Dr Eissenberg's presentation showed that most of the snus products launched so far in the USA deliver relatively low nicotine levels, and Dr Beiner's presentation showed that most Americans (wrongly) believe that smokeless tobacco is at least as harmful to health as cigarettes, and that relatively few are using these new smokeless products. Of course if the products deliver relatively little nicotine, and the population believes them to be just as harmful as cigarettes its really no surprise that few smokers are switching to them. Why would they? I continue to be perplexed as to why many tobacco control experts have great difficulty in admitting that many forms of smokeless tobacco are much less harmful than cigarettes (no lung cancer or respiratory diseases, and lower rates of virtually every other tobacco-caused illness than smoking, makes it at least 95% less harmful)'
.
What are your views?
sometime i smoke and i don't think it will effect me more
What is smokeless tabacco?
What is a snuff bullet?
by Answerbag Staff on July 24th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
In Soviet Russia does rooster snuff you?
by Have A Nice Day on November 4th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Are you more likely to get cancer from smoking or dipping?
by Answerbag Staff on March 16th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
How many pouches are in a skoal can?
by Answerbag Staff on March 13th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
For every person that chews tobacco and gets cancer, how many more that chew dont get cancer?
by Louie_Ranking on October 28th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading "... many forms of smokeless tobacco are much less harmful than cigarettes (... makes it at least 95% less harmful)". Would smokers consider switching over to smokeless tobacco? See my answer for full statement.
Comments
I would like you to read the relevent portions of the Doctor's statement that I have given in my answer before deciding, Talim. +6.
by Suby the Coat on June 15th, 2009
I did read it, and my decision is the same.
by Talimze on June 15th, 2009
So it is the feeling of the smoke going down into the lung and filling it that is more important than the craving for nicotine that keeps people smoking. Have I put it the right way?
by Suby the Coat on June 15th, 2009
That's part of it, I'd say.
by Talimze on June 15th, 2009
I can understand that. I was a smoker once.
by Suby the Coat on June 15th, 2009