High consumption of smokeless tobacco (“snus”) predicts increased risk of type 2 diabetes in a 10-year prospective study of middle-aged Swedish men
Abstract
Aims: Cigarette smoking increases the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D). In Sweden and the US, people shift from smoking cigarettes to smokeless tobacco, i.e. oral moist snuff, “snus”, to attain harm-reduction. There are limited and conflicting data as to whether snus increases the risk of T2D. The present study investigated if snus use predicts the risk of T2D incidence. Methods: This is a prospective population-based study where middle-aged Swedish men ( n=2,383), without previously diagnosed T2D, were investigated with oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at baseline in 1992–94 and at follow-up 10 years later. Odds ratios (ORs) for newly diagnosed T2D at follow-up were assessed among those using snus, or cigarettes, at both baseline and follow-up, adjusted for major confounders. Results: The OR for T2D was not significantly increased in the whole group of snus users. However, the risk of diabetes increased with increasing weekly snus consumption; ORs (CIs) for >four boxes of snus/week were 2.1 (CI 0.9–4.9), and for >five boxes/week 3.3 (CI 1.4–8.1). For comparison, men smoking at baseline and still smoking at follow-up had an increased risk of diabetes compared with never smokers, OR 1.5 (CI 0.8–3.0), most evident for those smoking >15 cigarettes per day, OR 2.4 (CI 1.0–5.8). Tobacco use was associated with estimations of low insulin response (OGTT), but not low insulin sensitivity (HOMA). Conclusions: High consumption of snus, like smoking, predicts risk of developing T2D. This should be considered when seeking harm-reduction by changing from use of cigarettes to snus. T2D risk from tobacco use may be mediated by effects on beta-cell function.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The odds of diabetes type 2 grow with increasing weekly snus consumption: OR = 2.1 (95% CI: 0.9-4.9) for > four boxes per week and OR = 3.3 (95% CI: 1.4-8.1) for > five boxes per week.
“the odds of diabetes type 2 grew with increasing weekly snus consumption; (OR = 2.1; 95% CI: 0.9-4.9 for > four boxes of snus per week; OR = 3.3; 95% CI: 1.4-8.1 for > five boxes per week) (Östenson et al. 2012).”
From Comparison of the Health Effects Associated with the Use of Snus and Tobacco-Free Oral Nicotine Pouches: A Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Östenson et al. 2012
Cites
Genetic and environmental determinants of non‐insulin‐dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM)
Hamman, R. F. (1992) · Diabetes/Metabolism Reviews · doi:10.1002/dmr.5610080402 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Manson, J. E., Ajani, U. A., Liu, S., Nathan, D. M., & Hennekens, C. H. (2000) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0002-9343(00)00568-4 · Cited by 245 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lafortune, L., Martin, S., Kelly, S., Kuhn, I., Remes, O., Cowan, A., & Brayne, C. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144405 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Kopa-Stojak, P. N., & Pawliczak, R. (2026) · Exposure and Health · doi:10.1007/s12403-026-00812-w
- Authors
- Östenson, C.-G., Hilding, A., Grill, V., & Efendic, S.
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-10-31
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 730-737
- ISSN
- 1403-4948
- 1651-1905
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review