I currently use vaping as my prime nicotine intake, but SNUS was very intriguing as another harm reduction product. After some research on my own and the episode of Inside Vaping featuring the guys that run this forum I decided to try it. So far I thoroughly enjoy the Swedish Match products. Obviously I have been following their application into the FDA, as advocacy is a huge part of my time spent in the vape world. Reading the articles today I came across something alarming, as I had never seen anything like this in my research (as preliminary as it was). In the comments section of this article (http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Smoking/50950) (http://www.medpagetoday.com/comments.cfm?tbid=50950) someone claiming to be a senior obstetrician had some negative opinions about their proposal. "Senior obstetrician 04/13/15After reading " Oral cancer in Swedish snuff dippers" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843910 .. Fda will throw all Swedish snus in Atalantic Ocean as carsinogen substance. Professor Hirsch with colleagues presents how easily You get cancer from snus in this article, pictures speak more than words. Surely Swedish Match will not recommend these snuscancer pictures in Rolling Stone Magazine' s snus ads which we can see every month...sad.."After looking at the study with my limited knowledge I am not sure what to think. It says Swedish "Snuff" everywhere, being new to this product I'm not sure about the difference drawn between the SNUS process to Snuff. Can anyone shed light on this for me? I know its a small sample size and its one study, but everything I have seen claims this is unheard of and cannot happen. I know you guys are very knowledgeable on this stuff, and I know when people quote a negative study in reference to vaping I usually know about it and know why it is flawed (as they usually are). Or I know there is some other extreme variable that does not pertain to most users. Thanks for taking the time, hope to hear back from you guys on this.