|
|
General
Started by Anonymous at 03-27-2008 6:55 AM. Topic has 2 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 03-27-2008, 6:55 AM
|
|
Anonymous
|
Amount of Nicotine in Chew
|
|
|
|
|
Is it true that Skoal or other forms of dip have 10 times the anount of nicotine? Or half a tin is equal to 4 packs of smokes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-27-2008, 8:29 AM
|
admin
Joined on 12-06-2005
Posts 114
|
Re: Amount of Nicotine in Chew
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what the exact proportions are; it seems to be true that among smokeless products, Skoal does have a relatively high nicotine content. But it doesn't really matter for two reasons. The first is that nicotine, as we have said many times, is not a major health concern. And secondly, you control how much you use. Whatever the pack says or contains, the amount of nicotine that enters your system is determined by how much you put in your mouth, and how often.
You do need a certain amount of nicotine to find a product satisfying if that's why you use it. If the nicotine content were too low in smokeless tobacco, and you were an ex-smoker used to a good jolt, it might cause you to return to smoking. One of the major problems with low nicotine content cigarettes, is that people smoked more to get the same effect so it ended up hurting them. If you have better nicotine content in cigarettes, you might smoke less, and it is the smoke that matters.
Of course, we all know that nicotine is the addictive element, and the source of satisfaction, in tobacco use and there is no getting around that.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
02-26-2009, 12:35 PM
|
admin
Joined on 12-06-2005
Posts 114
|
Re: Amount of Nicotine in Chew
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to remain transparent about our dealings, some might have
noticed the removal of a couple of posts here, one from an individual
describing how much they use, and my response to that. Their followup
to my response led me to reread the first one again and found I had
mistaken a ludicrous description for a serious question (so ludicrous
that I translated it into what I thought they were really saying). But
I was wrong. The post was a joke. What I misread was the amount they
claimed to use daily which would have made them a circus act to say the
least. The removal was not intended to remove my response but the
response was removed as a consequence of removing the original and
misleading post. (In other words, it should have been deleted in the
first place as spurious).
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
|