New data shows that tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs)
were at very low levels in almost all popular smokeless products available in
the U.S. in 2006 and 2007. The findings appear in a research article in
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (abstract here) authored by M.F. Borgerding and other scientists at RJ Reynolds Tobacco
Company.
TSNA levels for specific brands are listed in the table
below. In reviewing the data, one should
consider these points:
1. The table lists
levels in parts per million (ppm) by weight, or micrograms of TSNAs per gram of
dry product. This allows products with
different moisture levels (e.g., dissolvable tobacco at 4% and moist snuff at
about 50%) to be compared directly.
2. ALL of the
American products had low TSNA levels, especially when compared to products
from the 1970s and 1980s (described here). In the early 1980s, it was common to
see moist snuff products with TSNA levels at 40-80 ppm; by the end of the
decade, most products were under 40 ppm.
With rates declining further, to around 20 ppm in 1995, analytic reports
ceased.
3. Several Swedish snus
products were analyzed; all had TSNA levels below 2 ppm.
4. The lowest TSNA
levels were found in Ariva (0.1 ppm) and Stonewall (0.4 ppm) dissolvable
tobacco pellets made by Star Scientific, Inc. (here).
5. Chewing tobacco
products all had levels below the Gothiatek standard, which is 10 parts per
million. Gothiatek was developed by
Swedish Match in the late 1990s to serve as a voluntary standard for maximum
levels of some contaminants (described here).
6. The highest TSNA levels
(12-41 ppm) were found in powdered dry snuff, a form of tobacco historically
favored by older Southern women, but steadily declining in popularity (evidence here). When I worked with an investigator at
the Swedish National Food Administration to analyze TSNAs in American products
in 2003, we found very high levels in two powdered dry snuff brands ( abstract
here).
How do smokeless tobacco TSNA levels compare with those in
cigarettes? The Reynolds scientists did
not test cigarettes, but I did. Camel
and Marlboro cigarettes had TSNA levels around 7 ppm in 2003, putting them in
the same range as many moist snuff and chewing tobacco products. However, TSNAs are but one of many thousands
of toxins delivered in smoke, so comparing these agents in cigarettes and
smokeless is almost meaningless.
A National Cancer Institute fact sheet describes TSNAs as
“the most harmful chemicals in smokeless tobacco…” (here), but this study shows that TSNAs are present in tiny concentrations. As discussed in a previous post (here), there is virtually no evidence that current TSNA levels are associated with
any measurable cancer risks.
TSNA Levels in Smokeless Tobacco Products in the U.S., 2006 and 2007 | |
---|---|
Product | Parts Per Million |
Dissolvable Tobacco | |
Ariva | 0.1 |
Stonewall | 0.4 | Chewing Tobacco |
Beech Nut | 2.9 |
Hawken | 5.2 |
Lancaster | 1.3 |
Levi Garrett | 5.2 |
Red Man | 1.8 |
Red Man Golden | 1.2 |
Stoker Chew Apple | 4.6 |
Taylor’s Pride | 8.3 | Traditional Moist Snuff |
Cooper LC WG | 35.7 |
Copenhagen | 10.8 |
Copenhagen LC | 9.7 |
Copenhagen Pouches | 9.9 |
Grizzly LC WG 2006 | 10.1 |
Grizzly LC WG 2007 | 9.0 |
Husky FC | 11.2 |
Kayak LC WG | 25.5 |
Kodiak WG 2006 | 11.9 |
Kodiak WG 2007 | 13.1 |
Longhorn LC WG | 7.6 |
Red Seal FC | 10.0 |
Renegades WG | 7.9 |
Skoal FC Original | 10.0 |
Skoal LC Cherry | 9.1 |
Skoal LC Mint | 10.5 |
Skoal LC Straight | 10.4 |
Skoal LC WG | 13.9 |
Timberwolf LC WG | 8.1 | Snus and Snus-Style Snuff |
Camel Frost 2006 | 1.8 |
Camel Frost 2007 | 2.3 |
Camel Original 2006 | 1.9 |
Camel Original 2007 | 2.5 |
Camel Spice 2006 | 1.8 |
Camel Spice 2007 | 2.1 |
Catch Dry Eucalyptus* | 1.4 |
Catch Dry Licorice* | 1.4 |
General* | 0.7 |
General Portion* | 1.6 |
General White Portion* | 1.3 |
Skoal Dry | 2.7 |
Taboka | 1.6 |
Taboka Green | 1.6 | Powdered Dry Snuff |
Bruton | 12.2 |
Dental Sweet | 41.0 |
Levi Garrett | 25.8 |
Railroad Mills | 27.2 |
Red Seal | 18.6 |
*Manufactured in Sweden
LC- long cut
FC- fine cut
WG-wintergreen
4 comments:
my dad is dying from lung cancer and COPD from years of smoking. I smoked for 35 years before switching to Swedish snus. I wish my dad would have had access to reduced harm smokeless tobacco. people can say what they want but some of us can't or don't want to quit for various reasons.
the more i learn about smokeless the madder i become at our government and some anti-cancer groups. why they want to hide the truth about smokeless from smokers is impossible for me to understand.
if not for people like Brad Rodu i would still be smoking. i am not very educated but i can read and verify information. That's what I did a few years ago with information from Mr. Rodu and others. Odd though, whenever I tried to verify information from the government sites a lot of it led me to learning it was lies. I still ask myself the question, why do they lie about smokeless? Holding back information in formats that average or below average educated people can understand that could save their lives should be a crime.
none of us will make it off this planet alive, it is true. At the same time I can promise you that dying of lung disease is not the way you want to leave.
Thank goodness there are still some sane and morale people left.
thanks
You might be interested in this talk
http://www.fead.org.uk/video553/Deborah-Arnott:-Why-regulating-nicotine-effectively-is-the-only-way-to-end-smoking.html
which I accessed via a link from this article by Chris Snowdon.
http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/ash-having-go-at-chinese-now.html
At 7.35 Arnott deliberately conflates the ban on the Scottish Skoal Bandit factory with the Swedish EU snus ban, even implying that snus is an alternative name for US oral tobacco.
Correction to my previous comment. I gather snus is used in the USA to describe some types of oral tobacco. I don't know if Skoal Bandits fall into this category. I understand Swedish style snus is considered less harmful because its manufacturing process differs from that of some types of USA oral tobacco.
Yes but, Jonathan, the study above shows TSNA levels for American snus to be as low as Swedish snus. I thought American snus was more harmful than Swedish snus until I read this.
As stated by Brad Rodu there is virtually no evidence that currant TSNA levels are associated with any measurable cancer risks.
Post a Comment