Question: Does CMC chew?

[Snake]

1 hour ago, KSpan said:

While risk levels of specific lesions can vary by product, several of those statements are incorrect. A general study about disorders resulting from smokeless tobacco use:

https://www.cda-adc.ca/jcda/vol-66/issue-1/22.html

As one example regarding cancer risk:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15470264/

Another regarding oral cancer:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4268996/

Smokeless tobacco also quite literally elevates blood pressure upon use (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12704595/), and while far from the only activity to do so this represents an unnecessary risk factor, particularly for regular users. Also a strong association with CHD:

With respect to the second half of your post I'm not sure how that's relevant to a discussion about risk of tobacco products and no one made the type of claim you're seemingly attempting to refute but yeah, those are known to be unhealthy as well.

I won't make any more comments about this here so as to avoid further derailing.

Newer studies have proven that what you posted was done back in the late 60s and was riddled with inconsistency. So all it is was rehashed data thats just became standard. Here's a actual study done in the UK with actual blind testing and good candidates. 

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-334

Another study done in sweeden who has done quite a bit of research into the matter found no connection.

https://www.swedishmatch.com/Snus-and-health/Research-on-snus/Cancer/

 

So if you want to believe turn off the century data go ahead because I choose to believe modern data conducted in a scientific manner.

[mav1234]

50 minutes ago, Snake said:

Newer studies have proven that what you posted was done back in the late 60s and was riddled with inconsistency. So all it is was rehashed data thats just became standard. Here's a actual study done in the UK with actual blind testing and good candidates. 

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-334

Another study done in sweeden who has done quite a bit of research into the matter found no connection.

https://www.swedishmatch.com/Snus-and-health/Research-on-snus/Cancer/

 

So if you want to believe turn off the century data go ahead because I choose to believe modern data conducted in a scientific manner.

Here are some reviews and analysis from the last two years you may want to check out, as someone that wants to keep up to date with the literature:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470204508701736

https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-020-01677-9

https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/9/1162/4998035

https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/21/1/25/4793346

if you need pdfs lemme know.

Edited August 23, 2021 by mav1234

[Ocpanthertew714]

As long as he chews up defenders and stays healthy.  I dont give a dam what's in his mouth.

 

[Basbear]

Not surprising given the number of times Ive seen super healthy conscious people have unhealthy habits. I used to run in the same circles as nurses felt like 30% of them were regular smokers. All those west coast vegan women, when the sun was out came pills poppin. Could save soo many lives by listing xanax for containing animal products, tolerance was not-human for some of them. Some super picking lifting bros, were hooked on GHB or other local made designer drugs. 

[weyco2000]

On 8/22/2021 at 11:50 AM, Lemory said:

Could've been sunflower seeds

Most definitely sunflower seeds, most guys spit the seeds on the ground, he had the decency to use a cup. 

[KSpan]

17 hours ago, Snake said:

Newer studies have proven that what you posted was done back in the late 60s and was riddled with inconsistency. So all it is was rehashed data thats just became standard. Here's a actual study done in the UK with actual blind testing and good candidates. 

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-334

Another study done in sweeden who has done quite a bit of research into the matter found no connection.

https://www.swedishmatch.com/Snus-and-health/Research-on-snus/Cancer/

 

So if you want to believe turn off the century data go ahead because I choose to believe modern data conducted in a scientific manner.

Consider your sources there. Lo and behold, the first citation has some significant potential conflicts of interest: 

Quote

Competing interests

ES and RW work for Philip Morris International (PMI), R&D. Both receive their salary from PMI and both own shares in Altria, the holding company of PMI. PNL, founder of P.N. Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd., is an independent consultant in statistics and an advisor in the fields of epidemiology and toxicology to a number of tobacco, pharmaceutical and chemical companies.

For your second citation, that looks at one specific type of product, conveniently the one that the company sells. However, the studies I cited also note that this particular type of product may not carry the same risk profile, which I noted in the very first sentence of my initial comment.

Edited August 24, 2021 by KSpan