Correlates of use and expected use of smokeless tobacco among kindergarten children

Oral spit tobacco: addiction, prevention and treatment

The prevalence of smokeless tobacco is significant and reaches as high as 17% past month use in white males aged 18-25. Smokeless tobacco use is of concern because of the potential for addiction and the associated negative health consequences. This article reviews the basis for addiction to smokeless tobacco, examining the nicotine content in smokeless tobacco products, pharmacokinetics, psychoactive effects, tolerance, and withdrawal. It also explores the negative health consequences which include a number of oral pathologies and increased cardiovascular risk factors. Furthermore, it examines the factors associated with the initiation of smokeless tobacco use, and the current prevention programs that address these factors. Current smokeless tobacco treatment approaches are also discussed as well as predictors for abstinence. Finally, the future directions are discussed in light of the limited amount of research that has been conducted in the smokeless tobacco area, particularly related to prevention and treatment.

Smokeless tobacco, reaction time, and strength in athletes

PURPOSE

This study investigated the effects of smokeless tobacco on reaction time and strength in a group of Division III athletes.

METHODS

Athletes were tested for simple and choice reaction time, maximum voluntary force, and maximum rate of force generation of the knee extensors on a KinCom dynamometer at 250 degrees.s-1. Smokeless tobacco-using athletes (N = 20) were tested while both using and after abstaining from smokeless tobacco. Another group of athletes (N = 20) who did not use smokeless tobacco served as a control group.

RESULTS

Simple and complex reaction times were not affected by smokeless tobacco use or abstention. In the simple reaction time test, maximum voluntary knee extensor force was higher in the smokeless tobacco-using group while abstaining (P < 0.05). Maximum rate of force generation in the simple reaction time test was not statistically different between the conditions. In the choice reaction test, both strength parameters (maximum force and maximum rate of force generation) were higher in the user group while abstaining (P < 0.05) compared with the using condition. The strength parameter measurements in the control group were not statistically different from the tobacco-using group, while either using or abstaining.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that smokeless tobacco use has no effect on reaction time but may detrimentally influence maximum voluntary force and maximum rate of force generation.

Psychosocial factors in the use of smokeless tobacco and their implications for P.L. 99-252

This article briefly reviews the prevalence of smokeless tobacco use by males in the United States, the relationship of smokeless tobacco use to cigarette use, and patterns of use that include dosage, topography, products, and function of use. The primary focus of the article is to describe the concurrent and predictive factors associated with onset, use, and cessation of smokeless tobacco. The implications of P.L. 99-252, the Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Act of 1986, are discussed in the context of what is known about the psychosocial variables associated with the use of smokeless tobacco.

Smokeless tobacco use by youth in the U.S

Oral snuff and chewing tobacco, commonly referred to as smokeless tobacco, are being used by many adolescent and young adult males, and no indication exists that use by this group is declining. Users are at risk for oral cancer, noncancerous oral pathology such as leukoplakias, and addiction. Information about patterns of smokeless tobacco use and motivations of users may help planners develop and implement interventions. Variables include the importance of peer and family influences, social image, knowledge of harmful effects, regional differences, use of other substances, and addiction. Due to the addictive nature of smokeless tobacco, older youth may need cessation programs. Health educators are encouraged to include smokeless tobacco in their tobacco use prevention programs and to develop and implement comprehensive tobacco interventions appropriate for their youth population.

An interpretative review of smokeless tobacco research in the United States: Part I

The first part of a two-part series reviewing the published literature of smokeless tobacco in the United States and concomitant health effects associated with its use. This article delineates the current status of its prevalence, behavioral psychosocial factors associated with use, and review of the negative health effects associated with regular use.

Implications of Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Athletes

In brief: This literature review delineates the current status of smokeless tobacco. It discusses the prevalence and terminology as well as periodontal effects, buccal mucosal and soft-tissue alterations, leukoplakia, cancer, carcinogenic components, hemodynamic alterations, and potential addiction. It is clear that physicians and dentists should discourage their patients from using smokeless tobacco. Young people particularly may be influenced by popular sports figures and celebrities who convey the erroneous impression that smokeless tobacco is harmless.

Smokeless tobacco: a potential hazard to infants and children

During the past several years, there has been a growing interest and concern relative to the increased use of smokeless tobacco, especially use among young people. Dentistry is concerned, in particular, with the oral hazards that are associated with smokeless tobacco. Accidental ingestion of poisonous substances is a significant problem among children. A case is reported illustrating the potential hazard of nicotine poisoning in an infant that resulted from an accidental ingestion of a smokeless tobacco-related product.