Are Zyns a Viable Alternative to Smoking?

Why study Zyns?

While I was volunteering at a hospital one Saturday morning, a man in his 60s—who was on so many sedatives he could hardly tell me his name—gave me one request: to run to the convenience store across the street and grab a pack of cinnamon Zyns for him. Of course I did not get them for him, but this was just another instance, from students in Bobst Library to 20-somethings in bagel shops, of someone being addicted to nicotine alternatives. So that begs the question: Are Zyns a viable alternative to smoking and vaping?

What are Zyns and who uses them?

Zyn is a popular brand of oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) which first entered the market in 2014 and has been rapidly gaining popularity ever since, with a 250.8 percent increase in sales just between January 2023 and August 2025 alone (Samuel). ONPs deliver nicotine (derived either from tobacco or artificially synthesized) placed between the lip and gums. They come in various flavors, nicotine amounts, and are made by many brands. Unlike traditional smokeless tobacco products, they do not contain tobacco leaf and do not produce smoke or vapor, which often leads users to perceive them as a “cleaner” or more discreet alternative to cigarettes or vaping. Zyn, produced by Swedish Match, is marketed in sleek packaging with flavors such as mint and citrus that appeal to younger consumers. While many adult users report turning to Zyn as a substitute for smoking or vaping, surveys suggest that a growing number of adolescents and young adults are doing so as well.

Are Zyns better for you?

Both non-smokers and smokers alike remain largely uncertain about the risks of ONPs, with 49% of never users and 37% of current and former tobacco users being unsure whether ONPs are a less harmful alternative to other tobacco products (Travis et al.). While some participants perceive ONPs as less harmful than cigarettes, research also shows that packaging plays a significant role in shaping these beliefs, as “tobacco-free” or modified-risk labels can reduce perceived harm and increase intentions to use, particularly among youth and non-tobacco users. Together, these findings suggest that uncertainty and marketing strategies both contribute to ongoing experimentation and uptake of ONPs. However, the limited amount of research conducted points to ONPs as a possible source of harm reduction. Toxicological studies show that they contain substantially lower levels of harmful chemicals compared to cigarettes and traditional smokeless tobacco. (La Rosa et al.) 

Less Harm or Harmless?

Importantly, being an example of harm reduction does not mean that something is harmless, and lower levels of harmful chemicals does not mean a lack of harmful chemicals. (Saikh et al.) Research on smokeless nicotine products, including (ONPs), has identified several potential risks. Regular use has been associated with increased risks of Parkinson’s disease, certain cancers, birth defects, type 2 diabetes, oral submucosal fibrosis, and cardiovascular disease. Although these products are not inhaled, nicotine, flavoring chemicals, and other by-products are absorbed through the buccal mucosa into systemic circulation, where they may affect organs such as the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, pancreas, and esophagus. Oral pouches and smokeless tobacco may also affect the lungs through several mechanisms. Case reports have linked aspiration of smokeless tobacco to airway obstruction, and aspiration pneumonia, likely caused by saliva containing tobacco particles entering the airways. Additionally, nicotine absorption can lead to increasing acid reflux and the risk of gastric contents entering the airways, leading to pulmonary inflammation.

What does this mean?

Nicotine pouches do have the potential to be used as alternatives to smoking, vaping, and traditional nicotine sources. But they are just that – alternatives. Tools for transitioning off of traditional cigarettes, maybe, but not something to start for the sake of it. Harmful chemicals are still harmful chemicals. As sales and usage rise rapidly—especially amongst teenagers and young adults—it is crucial that more longitudinal studies assess the long term effects of ONPs and whether they serve the role of a less harmful nicotine source. Moreover, it is also important to pay attention to the rise of advertising, a crucial player in the rapid rise in sales in recent years. Lastly, it is important to educate the youth and future generations about how these products are not harmless.

Sources

Association, American Lung. “Zyn 101: What to Know about Big Tobacco’s Latest Addiction.” American Lung Association, www.lung.org/blog/zyn-nicotine-addiction. Accessed 4 Mar. 2026.

Lily Samuel November 19, et al. “Nicotine Pouch Use Surges among Young People.” CDC Foundation, 19 Nov. 2025, www.cdcfoundation.org/blog/Nicotine-Pouch-Use-Surges-Among-Young-People. 

Shaikh, Sadiya, et al. “Flavor classification/categorization and differential toxicity of oral nicotine pouches (ONPS) in oral gingival epithelial cells and bronchial epithelial cells.” Toxics, vol. 10, no. 11, 31 Oct. 2022, p. 660, https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10110660. 

Felicione, Nicholas J., et al. “Oral nicotine pouches: Rising popularity and state of the science.” Public Health Reports®, vol. 141, no. 1, 28 Apr. 2025, pp. 55–62, https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549251313668. 

Travis, Nargiz, et al. “The potential impact of oral nicotine pouches on Public Health: A Scoping Review.” Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 27, no. 4, 17 June 2024, pp. 598–610, https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae131. 

La Rosa, Giusy Rita, et al. “Nicotine pouches, oral cancer and tobacco harm reduction: Current evidence and research priorities.” Frontiers in Oral Health, vol. 7, 9 Feb. 2026, https://doi.org/10.3389/froh.2026.1761734.