Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Who are you "brainfan"? Do you get paid to oppose tobacco in all of its forms, regardless of the actual health effects...are do you do this as a hobby?— March 19, 2012 8:55 a.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
The idea that NO form of nicotine is the only form allowed ignores the issue here... Would you rather that your smoker friends die or switch to a product that is dramatically less harmful if they cannot quit? Snus may not be something you like or appreciate, but the scientific evidence is irrefutable. Compared to smoking or "chawin'backy" snus dramatically improves health for former smokers who switch. That has nothing to do with any individual's run ins with the law. It's inexcusable to ignore that evidence COMPLETELY because of someone's past. Regardless of Dr. Ross's past, snus is not to be feared but welcomed as a useful tool in reducing the harm of smoking.— March 19, 2012 8:54 a.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Snus is NOT spitting tobacco. Please stop confusing the two.— March 19, 2012 8:49 a.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Don, I have replaced smoking with snus. I have dramatically better health as a result. That's just anecdotal, I know. So look at the extensive studies conducted in Sweden, where a significant part of the population has done the same with similarly dramatic improvements in public health. I have nothing but admiration for those who can quit cold turkey. Recent studies suggest that the patches and gum do very little to help, and it's better to try cold turkey instead. Those same recent studies showed that snus was far better at aiding those who want to quit tobacco than patches or nicotine gums. I can dig them up, of you can find them yourself...let me know. Best, Fred— March 16, 2012 12:36 p.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Good take on the matter, Refried. In the EU, outside Scandinavia, just as you predict there is a grey-market already forming for snus. Who buys it? People who are nicotine addicted but want to reduce the harm of smoking tobacco. Yet the governments (outside Scandinavia) do their best to block this. Hopefully the do-gooders won't prohibit snus in the USA, condemning many to pointless early deaths. Refried, if you're still smoking, give the Swedish snus a try. (The American stuff is awful.) Get some sent to you online...I like General, personally...but you can try a variety pack. (Better than lung cancer, and goes with beer and coffee too.)— March 16, 2012 12:28 p.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Their interest is in maintaining their jobs and their self-image of ideological purity. Harm reduction threatens that. The best comparison is to drug warriors. They'd rather see a kid rotting in prison than getting high. It's not logical. They're not really helping society. But try telling them that...— March 16, 2012 12:22 p.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Does that even matter in the calculation of harm? Nicotine itself isn't killing people. It's the other stuff...tar, smoke born carcinogens, and so on. That's deadly.— March 16, 2012 12:20 p.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
The answer is to encourage use of Swedish snus. I've tried both (am I the only person commenting her who has direct experience in this matter?) and there's a big difference. The American variety is a lot bigger package, and a LOT stronger taste...makes me gag compared to the Swedish snus. Please don't conflate the two. The Swedish health benefits of harm reduction are irrefutable, and quite relevant. Taking an absolutist approach to prohibiting all such products leads, frankly, to deaths that could be prevented. For those who cannot quit smoking, snus is a FAR preferable alternative and shouldn't be dismissed as just a cynical marketing ploy. Look at the evidence, my friend, and I think you'll agree. Best, Fred— March 16, 2012 12:18 p.m.
A Great Escape, Part Two
Nicely told...great work.— March 16, 2012 12:09 p.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
And a bit more, from the 2008 EU study on Swedish Snus: The SCENIHR report implies that there is no longer a scientific basis for a continued ban of snus within the European Union because the committee unanimously says that (page references to the report within parentheses): * Swedish snus has dramatically less adverse health effects than cigarettes (p. 113-114) * A smoker who switches to snus substantially reduces his or her risk for tobacco-related disease (p. 115-117) * The availability of snus as a substitute for cigarettes has had positive effects on Swedish public health (p. 116-117) * Swedish data contradict the hypothesis that snus is a gateway to smoking (p. 108, 116, 121) (source: http://www.swedishmatch.com/en/Media/Pressrelease…) But just like in the USA, the public-health "guardians" decided this was not acceptable, and the ignorant slobs must quit smoking or die...snus is not acceptable except in Scandinavia which got an exception from the EU rules.— March 16, 2012 11:59 a.m.