What is this called in English?

[WarCon]

I read from several manufacturers sites that snus has no relation to cancer, but that is the same thing as asking the cigarette manufacturers if smoking is harmful.

The only sites that seemed to connect snus (by that name) and cancer were in Swedish. I couldn't find a swedish to english translator site so I was stuck. It also might of been from a company whose stock market call letters are snus (Who funny enough produces anti-cancer agents). I don't know since I couldn't decypher the sites though.

Here it isSwedish site (I think).

I would be curious as to what this document says also Snus

My thoughts on the matter are this, maybe "snus" doesn't have all the chemical's found in American snuff/chew/chewing tobacco, but it still has tobacco (is mostly) and it still forms tobacco-specific nitrosamines as it dries. These are some of the main carcinogens. This isn't disputed by any article not funded or written by tobacco companies and it certainly isn't by the Cancer Institute whose job it is to form these guidelines. Maybe your government has decided that snus is the lesser of two evils (since it seems that your country is pretty anti-smoking) and simply doesn't press the issue.

I did read that snus has a very long lineage (over 200 years) and maybe that history is more pervasive than cancer research.

If you really want to use snus, it is entirely up to you. I have a friend who smokes and uses chewing tobacco and I don't lecture him, but he also has no illusions about the dangers he is placing himself in. The only reason I responded is that I figured you should have that same right.

You can snus if you wanna.........

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: WarCon
I read from several manufacturers sites that snus has no relation to cancer, but that is the same thing as asking the cigarette manufacturers if smoking is harmful.The only sites that seemed to connect snus (by that name) and cancer were in Swedish. I couldn't find a swedish to english translator site so I was stuck. It also might of been from a company whose stock market call letters are snus (Who funny enough produces anti-cancer agents). I don't know since I couldn't decypher the sites though.Here it isSwedish site (I think).I would be curious as to what this document says also SnusMy thoughts on the matter are this, maybe "snus" doesn't have all the chemical's found in American snuff/chew/chewing tobacco, but it still has tobacco (is mostly) and it still forms tobacco-specific nitrosamines as it dries. These are some of the main carcinogens. This isn't disputed by any article not funded or written by tobacco companies and it certainly isn't by the Cancer Institute whose job it is to form these guidelines. Maybe your government has decided that snus is the lesser of two evils (since it seems that your country is pretty anti-smoking) and simply doesn't press the issue. I did read that snus has a very long lineage (over 200 years) and maybe that history is more pervasive than cancer research. If you really want to use snus, it is entirely up to you. I have a friend who smokes and uses chewing tobacco and I don't lecture him, but he also has no illusions about the dangers he is placing himself in. The only reason I responded is that I figured you should have that same right. You can snus if you wanna.........

I read the links, the first one is indeed in Swedish, but seems to be kind of a story, and not really related to the health effects of snus, but rather about a guy someone calls "snus mannen", which translates into "the snus man".
Among other thing this "snusmannen" claims that "Kissing a man who doesn't snus is like kissing a baby calf's ass"

The other one is in Norweigian, so I couldn't quite read all of it, but most of it was quite understandable, and it talked about negative health effects of snus, and listed quite a bunch, among others increased heard strain and bad effects on the gums, but no mention of cancer that I could find, but like I said, I couldn't read all of it, so I wont bet any money on it

And I already use snus, though not fulltime, and I have no illusions about it's ill effects, I know full well it isn't healthy, Im just pointing out that cancer is not among it's proven ill effects.
And like I said, the day new research proves that it does cause cancer, everyone is wellcome to tell me "I told you so" as much as they want.

Oh, and none of the links I provided were from tobacco companies, but from various authorities mostly, I intentionally left out tobacco companies as I agree about their bias, and probable lack of objectivity.

Funny how a question about language gets turned into a discussion about the ill effects of snus

 

[WarCon]

Oh yeah the original question would be probably snuff/dip or simply smokeless tobacco......... (Skoal and Copenhagen are common brands so I would think they probably had their origin from snus, what do you think?)

I have tried it (many years ago), the head rush and sick stomach were too much for me.

 

[amnesiac]

As much as I'd hate to incur the wrath of certain seasoned members here whose opinions I respect greatly, I'm going to agree with Sunner for the time being. There's simply no concrete study showing that snus causes cancer. Yes, snus contains tobacco, a known carcinogen, and yes, it is similar to chaw / snuff but snus seems to be manufactured in a method not specifically engineered towards causing slow and painful death, like Big Tobacco likes to do.

It could be that tobacco is relatively harmless in its natural state but becomes (more of) a danger when mixed with all the additives / fiberglass(?) and other tasty stuff which doesn't seem to be present in snus, at least according to Gothitek's site.

Either way, I still think it's incredibly disgusting to keep tobacco in one's mouth, whether it's in the form of snus or a good old coffin nail.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: WarCon
Oh yeah the original question would be probably snuff/dip or simply smokeless tobacco......... (Skoal and Copenhagen are common brands so I would think they probably had their origin from snus, what do you think?)I have tried it (many years ago), the head rush and sick stomach were too much for me.

Don't know about Skoal or Copenhagen, but it sounds reasonable.
A funny thing about snus(the Swedish kind anyways) is that foreigners seem to become ill the first few times, while it seems like most Swedes simpy become rather dizzy, but not real ill, never figured that one out.

And amnesiac 2.0, I thank you for showing that there's still some reason left in ATOT even these days.
I wouldn't say there are too many seasoned members left here anyways, most have left a long time ago cause it's virtually impossible to have a reasonable discussion about things these days.

 

[skace]

I wasn't going to get involved in the argument here, as I answered your question earlier on pretty easily and figured that would be that. But I gotta wonder about the logic here. It was not so long ago that cigs were considered healthy. Then all kinds of research came out about how they were bad for you. Now someone comes along saying Snus is good for you even though cancer sticks arn't. It seems like your hugging the wolf in sheeps clothing. The saying that comes to my mind is, "First time, shame on you. Second time, shame on me."

Something that Roger pointed out that was pure undisputable fact was, "Tobacco is a carcinogen". Now, I don't know what carcinogen stands for in swedish, but over here it means "Cancer causing substance". In other words "Tobacco is a cancer causing substance". Now you are basically saying "I don't care that snus contains a cancer causing substance, because it doesn't cause cancer". Now while you have webpages by the swedish government to back you up, please understand why it still sounds a bit odd.

Perhaps there is something in the procedure that has made it somewhat safer and allowed for good innitial research, but I would still hold heavy regard to the fact that you are putting a cancer causing agent in your mouth everytime.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: skace
I wasn't going to get involved in the argument here, as I answered your question earlier on pretty easily and figured that would be that. But I gotta wonder about the logic here. It was not so long ago that cigs were considered healthy. Then all kinds of research came out about how they were bad for you. Now someone comes along saying Snus is good for you even though cancer sticks arn't. It seems like your hugging the wolf in sheeps clothing. The saying that comes to my mind is, "First time, shame on you. Second time, shame on me."Something that Roger pointed out that was pure undisputable fact was, "Tobacco is a carcinogen". Now, I don't know what carcinogen stands for in swedish, but over here it means "Cancer causing substance". In other words "Tobacco is a cancer causing substance". Now you are basically saying "I don't care that snus contains a cancer causing substance, because it doesn't cause cancer". Now while you have webpages by the swedish government to back you up, please understand why it still sounds a bit odd. Perhaps there is something in the procedure that has made it somewhat safer and allowed for good innitial research, but I would still hold heavy regard to the fact that you are putting a cancer causing agent in your mouth everytime.

I understand what you're saying, and it sounds perfectly reasonable.
But, since Im neither a chemist/biologist nor a doctor, I tend to trust others that are, and those other people have concluded, multiple times, that it doesn't cause cancer, at least not that we can detect now, and at least to me, their research goes before my "common sense", simply cause I dont know how that stuff works on any advanced level.
But your argument is perfectly valid, and I thought of it the same way, before the results from these studies started showing up, one by another.

By the way, the Swedish word is "cancerogen"