TABLE 2.
Average initial characterization results from the smokeless tobacco products used in the studya
| Product | Moisture content (mg/g) (avg) |
pH (steady state) |
Particle size (mm) (mode) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AR | DC | AR | DC | AR | DC | |
| Brand A straight loose moist snuff | 561 | 542 | 7.7 | 7.8 | ≤1 × 2 | ≤1 × 2 |
| Brand A wintergreen loose moist snuff | 538 | 576 | 7.8 | 7.6 | 1 × 4 | 1 × 6 |
| Brand B straight loose moist snuff | 550 | 633 | 7.4 | 7.4 | 1 × 4 | 1 × 6 |
| Brand B wintergreen loose moist snuff | 537 | 564 | 7.4 | 7.4 | 1 × 6 | 1 × 4 |
| Brand C wintergreen loose moist snuff | 561 | 507 | 8.1 | 8.2 | 1 × 4 | 1 × 4/1 × >8 |
| Brand D straight loose moist snuff | 566 | 458 | 7.9 | 7.6 | 1 × 4 | ≤1 × 2 |
| Brand B pouches | 550 | 596 | 7.6 | 7.6 | ≤1 × ≤1 | ≤1 × ≤1 |
| Brand A pouches | 557 | 527 | 7.8 | 7.8 | ≤1 × 2 | ≤1 × 2 |
| Brand B mint pouches | 527 | 558 | 7.6 | 7.8 | ≤1 × ≤1 | ≤1 × ≤1 |
| Brand E snus mellow | 320 | 308 | 7.5 | 7.6 | ≤1 × 2 | ≤1 × 2 |
| Brand F snus mint | 261 | 282 | 6.0 | 5.8 | ≤1 × ≤1 | ≤1 × ≤1 |
| Brand B snus mint | 258 | 306 | 6.1 | 6.6 | ≤1 × ≤1 | ≤1 × ≤1 |
| Brand G chewing tobacco | 258 | 244 | 5.9 | 6.0 | >2 × >8 | >2 × >8 |
| Brand H chewing tobacco | 242 | 277 | 5.5 | 5.6 | >2 × >8 | >2 × >8 |
| Brand G Golden Blend chewing tobacco | 255 | 295 | 5.9 | 5.9 | >2 × >8 | >2 × >8 |
a
AR and DC indicate that the samples were purchased in the metropolitan areas of Little Rock, AR, and Washington, DC, respectively.