Smokeless tobacco use: harm reduction or induction approach?
Introduction
In recent years, consideration has been given to the use of oral noncombustible or smokeless tobacco (ST) as a harm reduction method for cigarette smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit using tobacco. As defined by the Institute of Medicine report, Clearing the Smoke, Assessing the Science Base for Tobacco Harm Reduction, [1] “a product is harm-reducing if it lowers total tobacco-related mortality and morbidity even though use of that product may involve continued exposure to tobacco-related toxicants.” The use of ST as a harm reduction approach has been fueled by the experiences in Sweden, where the rates of tobacco-related mortality and morbidity have been reduced significantly. These reductions have been attributed to the decreasing prevalence of cigarette smoking resulting from the greater use of snus (oral snuff) among the male tobacco users [2]. Furthermore, several Swedish cohort studies suggest that most smoking cessation by men occurred with the use of ST [3], [4], [5], [6]. However, a similar reduction in smoking prevalence has been observed among females who have not used snus instead of cigarettes. Therefore, the reduction in prevalence may be a result of other significant tobacco control measures that have been implemented in Sweden [7]. Thus, this issue continues to remain controversial among scientists and tobacco control advocates.
The use of ST as a method for reducing tobacco toxin exposure can occur on several levels. ST can be used as a substitute for cigarettes in situations where smoking is not allowed, when inconvenient or to reduce secondhand smoke exposure. Marketing attempts have been made by smokeless tobacco companies aimed at smokers to use smokeless tobacco in situations where they cannot smoke [8] or to switch to ST to reduce secondhand smoke (US Smokeless Tobacco Company, letter submitted to the Food and Trade Commission, 2003). These efforts to capture the market of cigarette smokers may have great economic benefit to the smokeless tobacco companies and lead to great public health harm. For example, this substitution approach would not necessarily lead to lower levels of nicotine or tobacco toxin exposure for the individual. That is, ST would be used in situations where the cigarette smoker would normally not have been able or want to smoke; thereby the use of ST could potentially increase overall exposure. Furthermore, this approach may lead to more harm by increasing the maintenance of smoking [8], although others have argued that use of ST products may eventually increase interest in quitting. Two other reduced exposure methods that are potentially more reasonable include the use of ST as a substitute for cigarette smoking for those who are primarily attempting to cut down on number of cigarettes. Or, ST could be used as a cessation tool, either transitionally towards cessation of all tobacco products or as a long-term substitute for cigarette smoking. The focus of this paper is the use of ST among existing cigarette smokers aimed at the latter two approaches. The pros and cons of using these purported harm reduction approaches need consideration because of the current endeavors of the tobacco industry to position ST as a safer alternative to smoking. In addition, a few members of the scientific and public health community are advocating that switching from cigarette smoking to ST use will have significant public health benefits. This paper will discuss the rationale for considering ST as a harm reduction method, the existing although limited literature that examines the efficacy of this approach, and future research recommendations. Although important, no extensive discussion will be presented as to whether public health will benefit if ST was chosen over cigarette smoking as a primary tobacco product.
Section snippets
Rationale
Several reasons have been given for the use of ST as a harm reduction method [9]. Prominent among these reasons is the fewer negative health consequences associated with ST compared to cigarettes. Estimates have been made that ST poses about 2% of the mortality risk of cigarette smoking [9], [10] and only half of the risk of oral cancer associated with continued cigarette smoking [9]. The average years of life remaining across age groups have been estimated to be the same among quitters of
The effects of smokeless tobacco use on cigarette smoking
In the United States, the rate of ST use among cigarette smokers is lower than cigarette use among ST users. The proportion of current cigarette smokers who report using ST ranges from 2.6% [82] to 4.7% (2000 NHSDA). In a recent study by Tomar [68], about 20% of daily snuff users and 40% of occasional snuff users were smokers. In prior studies, about 22.9% of current ST users were current smokers [82]. Epidemiological data show that a small number of smokers use ST to quit smoking and a
Future research directions
Although there is sufficient rationale to suggest that ST has the potential to be used as a harm reduction method for cigarette smokers, several significant concerns are also evident. Before any recommendations can be made for the use of ST as a means for cigarette reduction and cessation, several scientific issues need to be addressed.
Although ST leads to reduced mortality and morbidity compared to smoking, it is not a safe product and it is addictive. The extent to which this product imposes
Acknowledgements
This review was funded by NIDA/NCI grant P50-DA13333 (DH and CL) and T32 DA07239 (CL) and NCI Contract No. 263-MQ-210254 (ST).
References (90)
- et al.
Brave new world of tobacco disease prevention. Promoting dual tobacco-product use?
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2002) - et al.
Analysis of the relationship between smokeless tobacco and cancer based on data from the national mortality followback survey
J. Clin. Epidemiol.
(1992) - et al.
Oral cancer in a tobacco-chewing US population—No apparent increased incidence or mortality
Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod.
(1998) - et al.
Smokeless tobacco use and cancer of the upper respiratory tract
Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod.
(2002) - et al.
Smokeless tobacco as a possible risk factor for myocardial infarction: a population-based study in middle-aged men
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.
(1999) - et al.
Ambulatory 24-h blood pressure monitoring in healthy, middle-aged smokeless tobacco users, smokers, and nontobacco users
Am. J. Hypertens.
(1998) - et al.
Smokeless tobacco use and atherosclerosis: an ultrasonographic investigation of carotid intima media thickness in healthy middle-aged men
Atherosclerosis
(1997) - et al.
Relationship of cigarette smoking and snuff dipping to plasma fibrinogen, fibrinolytic variables and serum insulin. The Northern Sweden MONICA Study
Atherosclerosis
(1995) Snuff use and smoking in U.S. men. Implications for harm reduction
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2002)- et al.
Evaluating two self-help interventions for smokeless tobacco cessation
Addict. Behav.
(2000)
Concomitant use of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco: prevalence, correlates, and predictors of tobacco cessation
Prev. Med.
A pilot study of smokeless tobacco in smoking cessation
Am. J. Med.
Evidence that smokeless tobacco use is a gateway for smoking initiation in young adult males
Prev. Med.
Snuff—An alternative nicotine delivery system
The sociodemographic pattern of tobacco cessation in the 1980s: results from a panel study of living condition surveys in Sweden
J. Epidemiol. Community Health
Long term and transitional intermittent smokers: a longitudinal study
Tob. Control
Smoking cessation among daily smokers, aged 45–69 years: a longitudinal study in Malmo, Sweden
Addiction
Evolving patterns of tobacco use in northern Sweden
J. Intern. Med.
Swedish Match Company, Swedish snus and public health: a harm reduction experiment in progress?
Tob. Control
Tobacco-related mortality
Nature
Nicotine maintenance for inveterate smokers
Technology
The rewards of smoking cessation
Epidemiology
Chronic disease mortality in a cohort of smokeless tobacco users
Am. J. Epidemiol.
Comment on: Chronic disease mortality in a cohort of smokeless tobacco users [letter]
Am. J. Epidemiol.
Surveillance for selected tobacco-use behaviors—United States, 1900–1994
MMWR
The health consequences of using smokeless tobacco: a report of the advisory committee to the Surgeon General
Induction of oral cavity tumors in F344 rats by tobacco-specific nitrosamines and snuff
Cancer Res.
Tobacco habits other than smoking. Monographs on the evaluation of cancerogenic risk of chemicals to humans
The reemergence of smokeless tobacco
N. Engl. J. Med.
Aging of oral moist snuff and the yields to tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNA). Progress report prepared for the Massachusetts Tobacco Control Program
Smoking tobacco, oral snuff, and alcohol in the etiology of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck
Cancer
Oral snuff, smoking habits and alcohol consumption in relation to oral cancer in a Swedish case-control study
Int. J. Cancer
Smokeless tobacco use and increased cardiovascular mortality among Swedish construction workers
Am. J. Public Health
Impact of smoking and smokeless tobacco on the risk of cancer of the head and neck
Head Neck Surg.
Squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract. A case comparison analysis
Cancer
Association of cancer sites with tobacco and alcohol consumption and socioeconomic status of patients: interview study from the Third National Cancer Survey
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
Snuff dipping and oral cancer among women in the southern United States
N. Engl. J. Med.
Soft tissue sarcoma and tobacco use: data from a prospective cohort study of United States veterans
Cancer Causes Control
Tobacco smoking, alcohol drinking, and cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx among U.S. veterans
Cancer
Five leading U.S. commercial brands of moist snuff in 1994: assessment of carcinogenic N-nitrosamines
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
Unusually high levels of carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines in Sudan snuff (toombak)
Carcinogenesis
International Agency for Research on Cancer. Tobacco habits other than smoking: betel-quid and areca nut chewing and some related nitrosamines
Letter to the editor
Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod.
Oral spit tobacco: addiction, prevention and treatment
Nicotine Tob. Res.
Cited by (126)
Use of Traditional Smokeless, Snus, and Dissolvable Tobacco Among U.S. Youth
2023, American Journal of Preventive MedicineMethod development and validation of dissolution testing for nicotine release from smokeless tobacco products using flow-through cell apparatus and UPLC-PDA
2020, Journal of Chromatography B: Analytical Technologies in the Biomedical and Life SciencesRegulatory policy for smokeless tobacco
2020, Smokeless Tobacco Products: Characteristics, Usage, Health Effects, and Regulatory ImplicationsThe Minnesota SimSmoke Tobacco Control Policy Model of Smokeless Tobacco and Cigarette Use
2019, American Journal of Preventive MedicineEpidemiology and Demographics of the Head and Neck Cancer Population
2018, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North AmericaMonitoring harm perceptions of smokeless tobacco products among U.S. adults: Health Information National Trends Survey 2012, 2014, 2015
2018, Addictive BehaviorsCitation Excerpt :These changes have been accompanied by a debate among experts regarding whether smokeless tobacco products offer a “reduced harm” alternative to cigarettes (Hatsukami, Lemmonds, & Tomar, 2004; Savitz, Meyer, Tanzer, Mirvish, & Lewin, 2006). Some experts argue that smokeless tobacco use presents reduced health risks compared to cigarette use and, therefore, smokeless tobacco use should be promoted as an alternative to cigarette, while others argue that smokeless tobacco still presents health risks and, therefore, should not be promoted by public health officials (Gartner, Hall, Chapman, & Freeman, 2007; Hatsukami et al., 2004). The FDA has the authority to determine whether an individual product can be marketed as a modified risk tobacco product based on data submitted for the individual product.