ZYN, snus and the sometimes confusing world of terminology.

Language is an intriguing topic, the wording used to describe products has a large impact on how they are perceived by the public, media and politicians. These perceptions have an impact on policy. Perhaps if vape manufacturers had gone with ‘blueberry’ as to opposed to ‘blueberry razz candy cooler’ we wouldn’t have seen such an adverse reaction to them from some quarters.

I started using nicotine pouches in 2020, and at that time, hardly anyone in the UK knew what they were. I bought my first can (Bergamot Wildberry from Nordic Spirit) on a whim from a local convenience store purely out of curiosity. I knew about Swedish snus but had never tried it. I assumed nicotine pouches were similar and wanted to give it a try as vaping never quite worked for me.

After some research, I found they are indeed similar to snus (you place a portion in your mouth) but have a critical difference – nicotine pouches contain no tobacco (I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to repeat that).

Clarifying Terms and Differences

Let’s clarify some terms:

• Snus – traditional Swedish product banned in the EU with Sweden as the sole exception. Main ingredient is finely ground tobacco.
• Chew bags – like snus but long-cut tobacco. Requires chewing and generally seen as a way around EU restrictions. These require chewing to break the tobacco down.
• Nicotine pouches – similar to snus and chew bags in that it is a portioned parcel placed between the lip and gum. However, it contains no tobacco but instead plant fibres, flavouring and nicotine in a range of strengths.

Despite these distinctions, Wikipedia currently puts nicotine pouches under the snus umbrella. I must say I’ve got to disagree on that one.

The difference between traditional snus and nicotine pouches is significant. The base ingredient has changed. In nicotine pouches, the bulk of the product mass comes from plant fibres; in snus, that mass comes from tobacco. I often say nicotine pouches are to snus what vapes are to cigarettes. An evolution of a product to reduce the harmful effects.

Market Dynamics and Brand Influence

So, we have a situation where there is a new product on the market that is most easily compared to snus, despite the absence of its primary ingredient (tobacco). Issues arise in discussing or promoting this harm-reduction alternative, in part due to its history and entanglement with snus.

This confusion and retailers intention association with snus has always slightly frustrated me. Unfortunately, I don’t foresee any positive legislative changes around snus. Snus contains tobacco, and tobacco is now well and truly considered a dirty word. Snus is without a doubt a less harmful product, offering consumers a far safer choice, but I don’t see the political will for change here. As much as I’d love to be able to purchase snus in the UK, I can’t ever see any shift in favour of a tobacco product – especially when you consider the likely upcoming cigarette phase-out.

So, that leaves us with nicotine pouches. However, if you do a web search for ‘snus,’ you’ll quickly find yourself on a store that’s actually selling nicotine pouches. You can find websites with ‘snus’ in the name that only sell nicotine pouches. I can search my email inbox for ‘snus,’ and all I’ll see is nicotine pouches. Hopefully, you’re starting to see the picture? Due to snus having some recognition as a product, this is the keyword focus of a vast number of campaigns not selling snus at all and the (incorrect) terminology seems to have quickly caught on. I suspect many people using nicotine pouches may well refer to it as snus. This has implications for research too, if people are misinformed about the product they’re using, any data collected can’t really be relied upon.

With the rapid growth of the market, particularly in the US, we are now starting to see what I’m going to call ‘the jacuzzi effect’. Jacuzzi is a brand of hot tub. All jacuzzis are hot tubs but not all hot tubs are Jacuzzis.

The Future of Nicotine Pouches

I can accept this brand name product association. While I’m not a huge fan of ZYN pouches (too dry for my taste), it’s encouraging to see nicotine products reach a point where they’ve earned a synonym, despite some pushback. This helps differentiate them from snus. It’s also a clear indicator these products are finally gaining wider public recognition, which, in my opinion, will lead to more people moving away from smoking, provided it is accompanied by sensible regulation.

One increase in this brand and product visibility that does worry me a little is reading terms like ‘Zynfluencers’. Now to be frank I’ve never been entirely sure what an ‘influencer’ is, but my understanding these are young folk popular on social media. ZNY’s increasing viral nature, whilst increasing product visibility also runs the risk of a (disproportionate) focus on youth usage, which in reality is tiny.

Going back to the comparison with cigarettes and vape devices, the term ‘electronic cigarette’ is quickly being replaced by ‘vapes,’ a distinct product that was once sold in devices designed to look like cigarettes. Vapes are now, quite appropriately, discussed separately from cigarettes. We need to ensure nicotine pouches follow a similar path to avoid confusion with the tobacco products they aim to replace whilst also minimising any appeal to children. Regardless of your views on nicotine, I’d hope we could all see that every pouch used instead of a cigarette smoked is a win.

Richard Crosby