Nicotine sachets: a new addictive market behind the mirage of the "Swedish model"

The emergence of nicotine pouches is fueling a growing debate in Europe and beyond, both because of the rapid increase in their consumption and the rhetoric that presents them as beneficial alternatives to smoking tobacco. A recent analysis published in Tobacco Prevention & Cessation[1] These products are described as a "disguised threat," highlighting their strong appeal, rapid spread, and a perception of safety that is not based on solid scientific evidence. These findings call for an examination of their real implications for public health and a contextualization of the narratives that present them as harm reduction solutions.

A rapid spread that primarily affects young people and non-smokers.

The growth of nicotine sachets is more about expanding the nicotine market than about smoking cessation. Their development relies on a wide variety of flavors, high nicotine concentrations (some products can contain up to 50 mg per sachet), and marketing practices visible on social media and in stores, which contribute to normalizing their use.

In the United States, the National Youth Tobacco Survey identified nicotine pouches as the second most commonly used product among young people in 2024, with 1.8% of respondents reporting their use. This is less than the use of e-cigarettes, but for a relatively new product category, the increase in consumption is rapid.

These consumption patterns challenge the argument that these products are primarily intended for smokers seeking to quit tobacco. By delivering significant doses of nicotine to audiences, particularly young people, with no prior experience of addiction, nicotine sachets actually pose a high risk of developing addiction. In a context where knowledge about their long-term health effects remains limited and regulatory frameworks are uneven, their widespread use could contribute to the emergence of a new population of addicted users, independent of traditional smoking.

The Swedish example: decisive public policies, a transfer of practices, and an instrumentalized narrative

Sweden is regularly presented by tobacco manufacturers as proof that oral nicotine products can reduce smoking. This interpretation was discussed during a webinar organized by the coalition Smoke Free Partnership, during which experts pointed out that there is no causal link to attribute the decline in smoking solely to the availability of snus or nicotine sachets.

The observed decline is primarily the result of public policies implemented continuously and over time: bans on advertising and promotion, deterrent taxation, limitations on product visibility at points of sale, protection of minors, smoke-free environments, information campaigns, and easier access to smoking cessation. These structural measures, in line with international recommendations, have helped reduce the proportion of smokers to approximately 11% of the population, including 5% of daily smokers.

Conversely, the consumption of oral nicotine products has increased, particularly in recent years. Data presented during the same webinar indicate that the proportion of women using nicotine pouches doubled between 2016 and 2024, rising from 6% to 13%, while among 15-year-old girls, usage increased from 3% to 14%. These trends reflect less a cessation of addiction than a shift towards other forms of nicotine exposure, especially among young people.

This situation is currently being exploited by the tobacco and nicotine industry as part of its lobbying strategy to introduce snus into EU countries where it is banned and to expand sales of nicotine pouches, which are also prohibited in some member states. The slogan is "Quit like Sweden."«[2] This narrative is used to promote these products as simple solutions to the tobacco epidemic, minimizing the central role of public policy. This narrative is accompanied by multiple actions aimed at influencing public decisions: campaigns led by organizations presenting themselves as independent, events targeting parliamentarians, challenges to national bans, particularly in France and the Netherlands, and lobbying for more permissive regulations. These approaches contribute to the normalization of new nicotine markets and the repositioning of the industry as a legitimate player in the public health debate.

All available data converge on one clear conclusion: lasting progress in reducing smoking depends primarily on consistent, long-term prevention, regulatory, and fiscal policies. Conversely, the proliferation of new, highly addictive products is not a structural solution and can, on the contrary, contribute to maintaining, or even renewing, addiction, particularly among young people and non-smokers.

©Generation Without Tobacco

AE

[1]  Gonzalez LF, Friedman TC. Nicotine pouches: A wolf in sheep's clothing. Tobacco Prevention & Cessation. 2026;12(February):8. doi:10.18332/tpc/211847.

[2] Fewer Swedish smokers are not a result of snus, Tabaknee, published on February 5, 2026, accessed on February 9, 2026