Health - Smokeless tobacco & cigarettes vs. cancer

[dr0]

Smokeless tobacco and cancer


1. What is smokeless tobacco?

Tobacco that is not smoked but used in another form such as chewing tobacco, snuff etc.
For further information read the „Guide to Smokeless Tobacco Products” which can be found as a sticky in DF. (http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=28149)


2. What harmful chemicals are found in smokeless tobacco?

a) Chewing tobacco and snuff contain 28 carcinogens (cancer-causing agents). The most harmful carcinogens in smokeless tobacco are the tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). They are formed during the growing, curing, fermenting, and aging of tobacco. TSNAs have been detected in some smokeless tobacco products at levels many times higher than levels of other types of nitrosamines that are allowed in foods, such as bacon and beer.

b) Other cancer-causing substances in smokeless tobacco include N-nitrosamino acids, volatile N-nitrosamines, benzo(a)pyrene, volatile aldehydes, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, crotonaldehyde, hydrazine, arsenic, nickel, cadmium, benzopyrene, and polonium-210.
c) All tobacco, including smokeless tobacco, contains nicotine, which is addictive. The amount of nicotine absorbed from smokeless tobacco is 3 to 4 times the amount delivered by a cigarette. Nicotine is absorbed more slowly from smokeless tobacco than from cigarettes, but more nicotine per dose is absorbed from smokeless tobacco than from cigarettes. Also, the nicotine stays in the bloodstream for a longer time.

3. What cancers are caused by or associated with smokeless tobacco use?

a) Smokeless tobacco users increase their risk for cancer of the oral cavity. Oral cancer can include cancer of the lip, tongue, cheeks, gums, and the floor and roof of the mouth.

b) People who use oral snuff for a long time have a much greater risk for cancer of the cheek and gum than people who do not use smokeless tobacco.

c) The possible increased risk for other types of cancer from smokeless tobacco is being studied.

4. What are some of the other ways smokeless tobacco can harm users' health?
Some of the other effects of smokeless tobacco use include addiction to nicotine, oral leukoplakia (white mouth lesions that can become cancerous), gum disease, and gum recession (when the gum pulls away from the teeth). Possible increased risks for heart disease, diabetes, and reproductive problems are being studied.

[dr0]

Cigarettes and cancer

1. What are the effects of cigarette smoking on cancer rates?
Cigarette smoking causes 87 percent of lung cancer deaths. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in both men and women. Smoking is also responsible for most cancers of the larynx, oral cavity and pharynx, esophagus, and bladder. In addition, it is a cause of kidney, pancreatic, cervical, and stomach cancers as well as acute myeloid leukemia.

2. Are there any health risks for nonsmokers?
The health risks caused by cigarette smoking are not limited to smokers. Exposure to secondhand smoke, or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), significantly increases the risk of lung cancer and heart disease in nonsmokers, as well as several respiratory illnesses in young children. (Secondhand smoke is a combination of the smoke that is released from the end of a burning cigarette and the smoke exhaled from the lungs of smokers.) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Institute of Environmental Health Science’s National Toxicology Program, and the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have all classified secondhand smoke as a known human carcinogen—a category reserved for agents for which there is sufficient scientific evidence that they cause cancer. The U.S. EPA has estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke causes about 3,000 lung cancer deaths among nonsmokers and is responsible for up to 300,000 cases of lower respiratory tract infections in children up to 18 months of age in the United States each year.

3. What harmful chemicals are found in cigarette smoke?
Cigarette smoke contains about 4,000 chemical agents, including over 60 carcinogens. In addition, many of these substances, such as carbon monoxide, tar, arsenic, and lead, are poisonous and toxic to the human body. Nicotine is a drug that is naturally present in the tobacco plant and is primarily responsible for a person’s addiction to tobacco products, including cigarettes. During smoking, nicotine is absorbed quickly into the bloodstream and travels to the brain in a matter of seconds. Nicotine causes addiction to cigarettes and other tobacco products that is similar to the addiction produced by using heroin and cocaine.

4. How does exposure to tobacco smoke affect the cigarette smoker?
Smoking harms nearly every major organ of the body. The risk of developing smoking-related diseases, such as lung and other cancers, heart disease, stroke, and respiratory illnesses, increases with total lifetime exposure to cigarette smoke. This includes the number of cigarettes a person smokes each day, the intensity of smoking (i.e., the size and frequency of puffs), the age at which smoking began, the number of years a person has smoked, and a smoker’s secondhand smoke exposure.

[dr0]

Conclusion (Smokeless tobacco vs. cigarettes)

I guess it realy depends of the way of looking at things. For example I prefer cigarettes, not only because they are more habitual for me, but also because I see it as a more definite and distinct way of getting nicotine.

On the other hand, if I look at nicotine from a 'health-only' perspective, I'd suggest smokeless tobacco.

Just look at the facts – cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 430, 000 deaths in the United States each year. That means it’s one in every five deaths.

Estimated deaths from smokeless tobacco (oral cancer) in 2004 were at 4,830 men and 2,400 women.

So a simple calculation will tell us, that the number of deaths from oral cancer forms only ~1,2% from the total 420,000 deaths caused by cigarette smoking.

What can I say, I’m truly impressed.

References

1. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...acco/smokeless
2. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...Tobacco/cancer
3. http://www.acsh.org/healthissues/new...sue_detail.asp
4. http://www.oralcancerfoundation.org/...of_tobacco.htm

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Seems like he worked hard on it, +1 from me :>
	Well done... a very informative post.

[Humanity]

Originally Posted by dr0

Smokeless tobacco and cancer


4.) What are some of the other ways smokeless tobacco can harm users' health?
Some of the other effects of smokeless tobacco use include addiction to nicotine, oral leukoplakia (white mouth lesions that can become cancerous), gum disease, and gum recession (when the gum pulls away from the teeth). Possible increased risks for heart disease, diabetes, and reproductive problems are being studied.

Gum recession sounds like HELL, don't even want to imgaine it... no more snus for me
Nice post.

Hum.

[Ravwbean]

If you dont want to screw your gums and stuff, you could just change side of your lip between each can. This is what i do with swedish snus, the teabag verison. It would be a little harder with dip.

[Humanity]

Originally Posted by Ravwbean

If you dont want to screw your gums and stuff, you could just change side of your lip between each can. This is what i do with swedish snus, the teabag verison. It would be a little harder with dip.

And then, eventually what happens is you lose not one side of your mouth, but the whole thing. GG!

[Codehead]

"Oral snuff" is called snuss, snuff is nasal tobacco and nicotine is absorbed much faster (thats why you get nice nicotine "rush" from it) from it than cigarettes. Also from snuff you won't get any oral problems, only nasal problems. And snuff is most addictive nicotine product.

[baron samedi]

Isn't the jury still out on "swedish" snus and oral damage, compared to other forms of oral tobacco?
Also is there any concrete evidence to suggest serious nasal damage from snuff use?

[mouthwater]

Originally Posted by dr0

Estimated deaths from smokeless tobacco (oral cancer) in 2004 were at 4,830 men and 2,400 women.

You must note that the population size of smokeless tobacco users is far lower than that of smoked tobacco users. Your statistics would be best if calculated by number of smokeless tobacco related deaths divided by the number of smokeless tobacco users.

[Alicia]

i would also say that alcohol in combination with excessive amounts of tobacco related products also adds to the cancer risk and seems the only safe way of doing tobacco is to use patches.(sounds silly)

Reputation Comments on this post:

Patches contain nicotine, not tobacco.

[mouthwater]

Originally Posted by Alicia

...seems the only safe way of doing tobacco is to use patches.(sounds silly)

It's probably 'safest' to say there is no 'safe' way to use tobacco, only 'safer' ways than others.

[dongiovanni]

There's nothing wrong with a little gum recession - I guess a lot and your tooth will fall out, but I have no problems or discomfort from the fact that the gum is a little higher up on my 'snus-tooth', and unless I point it out, I haven't had a single person comment or even appear to notice it.
And I don't know about snuff and other forms of smokeless tobacco, but the general consensus these days is that there is NO CORELATION between oral cancer and snus. NONE! There is a higher risk of pancreatic cancer than if you didn't smoke at all, but nothing like the 75% increased risk of smokers.
Snus IS the healthy alternative. Just face it. It's so much healthier for the individual, and there are NO EFFECTS for anyone around them. No such thing as second-hand snusing.
All this misinformation about snus and smoking really pisses me off. There's a wealth of information in the Lancet on snus, which as far as I'm aware is the only comprehensive research done on the subject, and it looks pretty damn good for snus. However, I can think of one good reason to make snus illegal like it is in Australia - if more people snus instead of smoke, public health costs will go up. SMOKING DECREASES public health costs. THERE IS NO LOGIC behind taxing cigarettes so high. Same deal with obesity. I read this in this study: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/...ct/337/15/1052, and haven't had much luck on finding anything to counter it. And in a way it is pretty intuitive - old people cost more, smokers, on average, don't get old. They have more diseases, but dropping dead of a heart attack when you're 50 is pretty cost effective.

Sorry, that's my little rant. I'm stuck in Australia where snus is illegal, and I'm getting pretty edgy (and sick of smoking ridiculously expensive cigarettes). Fascists.

[turmoiled]

Its like anything else! meaning i enjoy chewing two tins a month. Unlike my other freinds who chew 1 tin every two days. It is the amount of absorbsion and iratation to the lining of the membrane of the mouth that will increase damage to the blood vesels. Causing a much greater risk of poisons and possibly cancer. But i still beleive it is safer to suck your thumb.!!!!