Joseph Hart 4 January 2024

 

In what we can hope is the turning tide of mainstream media coverage of alternative nicotine products, Cosmopolitan Magazine, of all places, has posted an even-handed article on snus and nicotine pouches.

We were bowled over late last year when The Times produced actual journalism in their article on nicotine pouches. In fact, I’d just gotten up, and now I’m knocked back down all over again by this online article from the quarterly American magazine.

The article can be read here – ‘What is snus? Are nicotine pouches better for you than smoking or vaping?‘

What Cosmo gets right

There is a lot that the author gets right here. They ask their sources the right questions, provide clear information on the differences between cigarettes, nicotine pouches, and snus, and even cite research that shows that snus reduces the risk of cancer when compared to people who smoke cigarettes.

Additionally, they make it clear that these products aren’t something you should take up unless you’re currently using cigarettes. I think that’s something that will come up for debate in the future as we understand more about the benefits of nicotine for well-being and mental and athletic performance, but let’s just say I don’t expect Cosmopolitan to lead the charge on rethinking nicotine for now.

What’s more, the article, or at least Ian Budd, one of the sources, does suggest that pouches are an effective way to stop smoking. He also recommends exploring other nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) options, like patches, gum, or inhalers but stops short of saying why he believes nicotine gum has an advantage over pouches. I’d imagine that would be a tough case to state.

AI generated image of Cosmopolitan Magazine beside nicotine pouches and cigarettes.

Some complaints

The article draws from advice from two individuals. They are:

  • Ian Bud, a pharmacist
  • Libby Clarke, Managing Consultant of Toxicology at the international consulting group Broughton

Both sources prove their worth thanks to their obvious expertise in the field of pharmacology. However, I can’t help but feel that including a harm-reduction voice could have given the piece a bit more heft by explaining the context of the products and even highlighting the existential threat posed by misguided regulations.

Other than that, there are a few of the cautious, mealy-mouthed statements that we’ve all come to expect from pieces on harm-reduction products. For example:

In theory, snus and nicotine pouches should be better for you than cigarettes.

I get that there are very few incentives for a writer to stick their neck on the chopping block and declare pouches as “safe.” I’m not even sure what safe means in this context. As safe as water? That would be an absurdly high bar for any product that is not water.

The other thing is we don’t need to rely on “theory.” There are decades of research into snus, and thanks to biomarkers, we can also know a lot about the different health outcomes of using nicotine pouches vs cigarettes without relying on long-term studies.

Truthfully, It’s only in the deranged, WHO money-addled minds of anti-nicotine cranks that these products are even comparable healthwise. It’s not, and it should not be controversial to say that the risk profile differences between cigarettes and nicotine pouches are night and day.

Final thoughts

Fashion magazines, alongside social media, are far bigger concerns to the health of teenagers than alternative nicotine products like nicotine pouches. However, you’d never know that by reading the media. Thankfully, this article in Cosmopolitan Magazine shows some respect to their readers by actually giving them information that could help them quit smoking this year.

I don’t really know much about Cosmopolitan outside it being a cultural institution that posts a lot of How to Please Your Man content. Well, Cosmo, you’ve certainly pleased this man, and all it took was giving nicotine pouches a fair shake.