ライフサイエンスコーパス: smokeless tobacco

1 f quitting which do not include switching to smokeless tobacco.

2 e acute hemodynamic and autonomic effects of smokeless tobacco.

3 sues, less is understood about the effect of smokeless tobacco.

4 r pipe smokers, and 2% were current users of smokeless tobacco.

5 te smoke may have more profound effects than smokeless tobacco.

6 31-2.59], respectively), attempt to purchase smokeless tobacco (adjusted OR, 2.16 [95% CI, 1.90-2.45]

7 favoured by most smokers (82%) overall, but smokeless tobacco and bidis were commonly used in India

8 Furthermore, combined use of smokeless tobacco and cigarettes did not increase overal

9 cancer mortality rate among combined users (smokeless tobacco and cigarettes), based on the rates fo

10 al. describe the association between use of smokeless tobacco and head and neck cancer in 11 US case

11 Few or no associations between each type of smokeless tobacco and HNC were observed among ever cigar

12 ion on bidis (small hand-rolled cigarettes), smokeless tobacco, and locally brewed alcohols.

13 e exposed organotypic cultures for 3 days to smokeless tobacco aqueous extracts and determined the ch

14 The FDA thus concluded that cigarettes and smokeless tobacco are subject to FDA jurisdiction becaus

15 Current use of smokeless tobacco at baseline was associated with 1.27-f

16 correlated with number of tins or pouches of smokeless tobacco consumed.

17 We hypothesized that smokeless tobacco could modulate the growth of keratinoc

18 rrent prevalence, 15.7% vs 3.9%; P<.001) and smokeless tobacco (current prevalence, 8.7% vs 0.4%; P<.

19 s, pipe tobacco, hookah, snus pouches, other smokeless tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, bidis, and krete

20 A determined that nicotine in cigarettes and smokeless tobacco does "affect the structure or any func

21 Overall, these data suggest that smokeless tobacco elicits plasma exudation in the oral m

22 lth questionnaire revealed that he was using smokeless tobacco every day.

23 effects of cigarette smoke extract (CSE) and smokeless tobacco extract (STE) on cell survival and mot

24 Exposure to smokeless tobacco extract was associated with a signific

25 Smokeless tobacco extract-induced leaky site formation a

26 Indomethacin had no significant effects on smokeless tobacco extract-induced responses.

27 , therefore, were differentially affected by smokeless tobacco extracts in an organotypic tissue mode

28 In contrast, smokeless tobacco extracts promoted fibroblast growth at

29 shown that most consumers use cigarettes and smokeless tobacco for pharmacological purposes, includin

30 Use of smokeless tobacco in the United States has been relative

31 d of accelerating the decline in smoking and smokeless tobacco initiation.

32 dical school curricula, specific training in smokeless tobacco intervention, tobacco intervention tra

33 Smokeless tobacco is a powerful autonomic and hemodynami

34 Smokeless tobacco is associated with pathologic alterati

35 factor for periodontal disease, the role of smokeless tobacco is unclear.

36 The presence of oral smokeless tobacco lesions among adolescents may be an ea

37 Preventing smokeless tobacco lesions and their possible malignant t

38 Smokeless tobacco lesions were detected in 1.5% of stude

39 tronger risk factor than chewing tobacco for smokeless tobacco lesions, but the use of either of thes

40 cohol or cigarettes may increase the risk of smokeless tobacco lesions.

41 These results indicate that smokeless tobacco may also be an important risk factor f

42 s to determine whether an aqueous extract of smokeless tobacco (moist snuff) increases clearance of m

43 arction (MI) in people who use snus, a moist smokeless tobacco product, we hypothesized that disconti

44 with regular and heavy nicotine intake from smokeless tobacco rather than from smoking.

45 Current users of smokeless tobacco should be informed of its harm and adv

46 the validity of self-reported information on smokeless tobacco (SLT) use is uncertain.

47 on (EU) legislation bans the sale of snus, a smokeless tobacco (SLT) which is considerably less harmf

48 Despite the reported effects of smokeless tobacco (ST) on the periodontium and high prev

49 mucosal lesions frequently occur at sites of smokeless tobacco (ST) placement.

50 All smokeless tobaccos stimulated keratinocyte proliferation

51 A) asserted jurisdiction over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosm

52 co smoking (1.90 [1.38-2.62]; p<0.0001), and smokeless tobacco use (1.32 [1.03-1.69]; p=0.030) than i

53 ment for confounders, no association between smokeless tobacco use and all-cause (hazard ratio = 1.1,

54 ter understand the cancer risks of exclusive smokeless tobacco use and dual use of smokeless tobacco

55 Previous studies on smokeless tobacco use and head and neck cancer (HNC) hav

56 rvey was to evaluate the association between smokeless tobacco use and severe active periodontal dise

57 udy was to characterize the relation between smokeless tobacco use and the risk of all-cause and dise

58 Smokeless tobacco use appears to be associated with HNC,

59 e smoking, nicotine replacement therapy, and smokeless tobacco use during pregnancy are associated wi

60 The pooled prevalence of current smokeless tobacco use in pregnant women was lowest in th

61 The health effects of smokeless tobacco use need further documentation.

62 The difference in smokeless tobacco use prevalence between HIV-positive an

63 7.8) for tobacco smoking, 3.4% (1.8-5.6) for smokeless tobacco use, and 27.1% (22.8-31.7) for any tob

64 1.9) for tobacco smoking, 2.1% (1.1-3.4) for smokeless tobacco use, and 3.6% (95% CI 2.3-5.2) for any

65 ative prevalence ratios for tobacco smoking, smokeless tobacco use, and any tobacco use separately fo

66 luc), in urine and plasma after cessation of smokeless tobacco use, in which NNK is administered p.o.

67 d at intervals 2-126 days after cessation of smokeless tobacco use.

68 lity of borderline significance among female smokeless tobacco users (hazard ratio = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.0

69 eline (1971-1975) were categorized as either smokeless tobacco users (n = 1,068) or non-smokeless tob

70 r smokeless tobacco users (n = 1,068) or non-smokeless tobacco users (n = 5,737).

71 igarettes), based on the rates for exclusive smokeless tobacco users and exclusive smokers, was highe

72 ays after cessation than at baseline in both smokeless tobacco users and smokers, indicating stereose

73 Gluc (26.1 +/- 15.1 versus 39.6 +/- 26.0) in smokeless tobacco users and smokers.

74 3.89 +/- 2.43) were significantly shorter in smokeless tobacco users than in smokers.

75 The mortality experience of smokeless tobacco users was not significantly greater th

76 assessed the 20-year mortality experience of smokeless tobacco users.

77 the authors examined whether current use of smokeless tobacco was associated with increased incidenc

78 In conclusion, current use of smokeless tobacco was associated with increased risk of

79 Past use of smokeless tobacco was not associated with CVD incidence.

80 adults and never-smokers who currently used smokeless tobacco were twice as likely to have severe ac

81 lusive smokeless tobacco use and dual use of smokeless tobacco with other tobacco products, including