Talk:Snuff (tobacco)/Archive 2

What are the effects?

Could someone please write a section of why people use this? Is it a stimulant, a depressant? What are the effects? Thanks. 121.98.170.140 (talk) 14:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

It's nicotine, so read up on that, the articles for cigarettes and cigars dom't go into detail about their effects nor should this one.--Hellahulla (talk) 13:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Cocaine, other drugs

I did not pass over the comment above-tobacco and its active ingredient, nicotine, is a stimulant (there is more information in the tobacco/nicotine pages)

Recently, i noticed someone included information about insuffluated cocaine in the article. This lead me to beleive that this page should be merged with a page concerning all types of insuffulated drugs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.160.253.124 (talk) 02:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I would disagree on the merger there. Trying to take snuff like it's cocaine will only be painful, and produced a reduced effect. Go out to youtube if you'd like, and look at some videos of people taking snuff, the ones who rail it like coke usually wind up crying at the end. Shikitohno (talk) 02:29, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

John Hill

I have read numerous sources online claiming that John Hill's "Cautions against the immoderate use of snuff" was an inaccurate study published to get revenge on a local tobacconist. While I cannot attest to the validity of these claims, I do know that John Hill's Wikipedia article describes him as a "quack doctor" who prepared "vegetable medicines". In addition, the claims of John Hill, who was primarily a botanist, have since been disproven by a number of modern health organisations, such as the Royal College of Physicians. I believe that these facts should be mentioned in the article, especially considering John Hill's contentious claim is one of the main sources in the article concerning the health impacts of nasal snuff use. - 59.101.51.7 (talk) 06:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Health risks.

"There is little empirical evidence that switching from cigarettes to smokeless tobacco reduces health risks"

I believe the fact that no empirical evidence has been produced to show snuff kills the same amount of people as cigarettes proves that switching does reduce health risks. Judging by the few available statistics it is easy to see smoking tobacco is far more dangerous than snuffing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.220.122.143 (talk) 16:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

That depends on how much evidence has been sought; but anyway, we report facts not research (or deduce) them --Arkelweis (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

UK Prices

I notice that the section Legal issues second paragraph it says "Snuff was for some time cheaper than cigarettes" as far as I know (and I should as I buy the stuff often enough) snuff is still tax exempt and still much cheaper than cigars, cigarettes and loose tobacco. --Lakkasuo (talk) 19:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Found a source and corrected. Also I received an email form one online snuff retailer confirming the pricing and regulation.--Lakkasuo (talk) 03:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Sneeze?

Is the stuff that makes you sneeze? There's not much in the article as to how snuff affects the user. -- œ^™ 05:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Some varieties can be sneezy, which is why websites selling snuff frequently sell hankies as well. Frotz (talk) 06:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Think you could incorporate that information somehow into the article? -- œ^™ 21:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

How's this? I'm not sure talking about hankies is particularly relevant. Frotz (talk) 22:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

That's nicely done, but you will need to sauce the information. No matter how trivial. Even as a snuff user (I assume) you know it to be true, that is not good enough for Wikipedia standards. That said one of the header images is of a gentleman snuffing then sneezing :)

Also, something irrelevant, what's your snuff of choice?--Lakkasuo (talk) 03:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I think the latest modification should do the trick. I like Sharrow's SP and Gawaith Apricot. Frotz (talk) 04:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

That reads well, thanks. You can't really fault SP can you :) I really do like the more ... ahem, feminine? snuffs. Like rose of sharrow and royal George (another sharrow) is particularly nice for me.--Lakkasuo (talk) 03:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

"Scandinavian snus is applied to the gums towards the back of the mouth"

This might be the case fore some snus users, but i wouldn't say that it's a general rule, since most snus users i know (I'm Swedish) apply snus to the gums in the fronts of their mouths, under their upper lip. Thus I'm rewriting this sentence. - Eje —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.67.196 (talk) 02:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

•thumbs up•--Lakkasuo (talk) 07:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Notable Manufacturers

As for "Please read Wikipedia guidelines" - here's some links for me: WP:ELNO, WP:VANDTYPES#Spam external linking, WP:LINKSPAM, WP:BFAQ#ADVERT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.225.52.100 (talk) 18:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Any reason there's a list of "notable manufacturers" on the page? None are sourced to anything but their own websites, I don't see how they're notable, besides the fact they've been doing it for years. I'd suggest the entire section is removed (with the image moved). Worm^TT 18:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I have chopped out the unlinked companies on the basis that they are not notable. I have also tagged Pöschl for A7 speedy deletion. The notability of the other bluelinks is dubious as those articles are very light on sources. – ukexpat (talk) 18:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Good job. Was going to do something similar after finishing up elsewhere, glad you made my life easier! Worm^TT 19:05, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Just to throw in my two cents, but some of those companies with no wiki pages should probably be considered notable. Fribourg and Treyer were the purveyors of snuff to the Hanoverian monarchs. Until their store closed down (in the 60s, I believe) they were the oldest snuff producers operating in England, and that title has since passed on to Wilsons of Sharrow. Bernard's is the last remaining commercial snuff producer, to the best of my knowledge, who still make a line of almost entirely schmalzlers, which are the traditional snuffs of Germany, associated with Oktoberfest now. Toque, I don't have much for aside from some of their odder flavours, and I believe they won some sort of export award last year. Dholakia is one of the larger Indian snuff companies, and has expanded to producing European and American product lines. I'm sure I can find some relevant materials to show why they're notable, that don't come exclusively from the companies websites. I know for a fact I've got a small book lying about that has a fair amount of information regarding Fribourg and Treyer specifically, and I can probably find a good deal for Bernard's, McChrystal's, Wilson of Sharrow, and possibly Toque. Long story short, not all of them are notable, but there are several that are. Give me a week or two to knock some things together and I'll show you why.Shikitohno (talk) 02:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)