A recently published international study based on a trial conducted in 2024, has shed new light on the evolving landscape of nicotine pouch technology, offering hope for oral nicotine users seeking lower-risk alternatives. As policymakers across Europe double down on bans and restrictive measures, scientific advancements have consistently indicatd that not all nicotine products carry equal risks, and that some could improve health outcomes compared to traditional tobacco.
Published in Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, the pilot study examined the effects of a uniqely manufactured nicotine pouch: Stingfree Strong Blue Mint, designed with a plant-based internal barrier to protect gum tissue. Conducted by a team of researchers from Sweden, Poland, Indonesia, Moldova, and the UK, and supported by Italy’s Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR), the study focused on 23 Swedish dental professionals who were regular users of snus or nicotine pouches. Over five weeks, participants exclusively used the novel pouch, reporting their oral health status and providing photographic evidence.
The results were striking. The prevalence of oral lesions fell from nearly 96% to under 70%. Moderate to severe lesions dropped significantly, with nearly 40% healing completely. Gingivitis cases disappeared entirely, and irritation decreased by 90%. These findings suggest that product design plays a critical role in user safety and highlight the potential for technology to drive meaningful harm reduction in the nicotine sector.
Nicotine pouches under fire in Europe
This development comes at a particularly challenging time for Brits, given the ban on disposable vapes gone into effect on June 1st. With over half a million Britons now using pouches as a smoking cessation tool, the French ban could endanger the progress made by those transitioning away from cigarettes. British athletes attending French events may also inadvertently breach local laws, raising questions about enforcement and fairness.
France’s sweeping policy has ignited fears of driving demand underground, much like historical attempts at prohibition. Critics argue it undermines public health by discouraging the use of safer nicotine products, especially when nations like Sweden have demonstrated how alternatives like pouches can contribute to some of the lowest smoking rates in Europe.
Can innovation survive the crackdown?
Ireland too is following a similarly hostile path. The country’s vaping regulations—including a disposable vape ban, flavour restrictions, and a new excise duty—signal a broader EU-influenced shift away from harm reduction. With vapers facing increasing pressure and limited legal alternatives, the question arises: could nicotine pouches fill the gap? While Ireland hasn’t yet banned pouches, the environment is growing less tolerant, and the potential of these products may be squandered by policy short-sightedness.
All of this underscores a central tension in tobacco control today: whether to restrict or innovate. While regulators tighten their grip, scientific evidence increasingly supports the view that – as CoEHAR founder Prof. Riccardo Polosa, put it “not all nicotine products are created equal.” Innovations like the gum-friendly nicotine pouch featured in the Swedish study, prove that it is possible to reduce harm, not just replace one risk with another. “This is a positive step forward for tobacco harm reduction,” added Polosa “This development marks real progress in tobacco harm reduction. By engineering products that minimize risk and help smokers quit, we achieve an unequivocal win for public health.”
Vaping Post asked CoEHAR whether the there are any plans underway to officially present the findings to the EU, and Prof. Polosa replied with a resounding yes. “You raise a crucial point. While the preliminary findings are encouraging, the current regulatory hostility toward ONPs across the EU reflects a broader skepticism rooted in insufficient independent data and robust clinical evidence.”
“Although we hope our observational study can bring substance to the ONP debate, CoEHAR team strongly believes that only a more substantial, science-driven knowledge base will effectively shift the narrative and inform more balanced policymaking. This is why we are prioritizing rigorous, peer-reviewed research. We intend to compile a more comprehensive document covering toxicology, clinical outcomes (including those described in the present study), and user behavior and plan to engage with regulatory stakeholders and policymakers,” added Polosa.
Gum-safe, law-unsafe
For policymakers genuinely committed to reducing smoking-related diseases, the message is clear: safer nicotine products must remain accessible, affordable, and above all, legal. Public health can no longer afford to ignore the growing body of evidence showing that product innovation, combined with smart regulation, is a more effective path forward than prohibition.
Ultimately, harm reduction isn’t just about offering alternatives—it’s about creating an environment where those alternatives can succeed. Whether it’s improved pouch technology or regulated vaping, the global nicotine landscape is at a crossroads. The decisions made now will determine whether innovation is embraced or stifled, and whether millions of smokers will continue to have viable paths toward a healthier future.
Crackdown on Nicotine Pouches Announced in the UK Raises Alarm Among Smoking Cessation Experts
