How Zyn nicotine pouches became America's new addictive obsession
Why it matters: Sales of Zyn nicotine pouches are soaring, prompting the tobacco company that makes them to scramble to boost U.S. production to meet demand.
The big picture: People are popping nicotine pouches into their mouths at games, at the movies, at the workplace, at home, at the store — it's America's new addictive habit.
Celebrity Josh Brolin even admitted to using it while sleeping (which is not recommended).
How it works: Zyn pouches are placed between the gum and lip, gradually releasing nicotine over time.
The pouches are discreet and don't produce smoke or odors like cigarettes.
Threat level: The product is addictive because nicotine is addictive.
But it does not cause cancer since it doesn't contain tobacco, whose harmful chemicals are carcinogenic. As a result, advocates say nicotine pouches can serve as a safer alternative to smoking.
Philip Morris International U.S. CEO Stacey Kennedy argued that nicotine is "misunderstood" and contains "cognitive benefits."
"You have to be able to separate out the misconceptions of what causes harm — and nicotine is probably one of the most misunderstood compounds, because many people believe that nicotine is responsible for smoking-related disease, and it's not," Kennedy said in an interview.
Yes, but: Tobacco industry watchdogs say products that contain nicotine, such as pouches and e-cigarettes, can serve as a gateway to smoking, especially for teens.
"Tobacco companies have a long history of lying to Congress and the public about the addictiveness of nicotine, so they're not a credible source of information about nicotine," Yolonda C. Richardson, CEO of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, told Axios in an email.
"While those who smoke heavily and have been unable to quit may potentially benefit from switching completely to nicotine pouches, there is a concern that they may appeal to adolescents and other new users of nicotine, particularly through the way they are featured in advertisements," according to a synopsis of a Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health study.
By the numbers: U.S. shipments of Zyn pouches rose 177% from the first quarter of 2023 to the first quarter of 2025.
The company got 42% of its revenue from smoke-free products in Q1 2025 as it pursues its goal of one day ending cigarette sales — a stated objective that critics say is hollow given that smokers continue to deliver substantial revenue.
PMI — which sells cigarettes outside of the U.S. but does not sell them here — still gets a majority of its revenue from smokers, but that's likely to flip soon as Zyn sales continue to grow. (PMI split off from Philip Morris USA owner Altria Group in 2008. Their deal called for Altria to sell Marlboro cigarettes in the U.S., while Philip Morris International would sell them in other markets.)
State of play: Sales could accelerate further after the FDA, in the final days of the Biden administration, authorized the marketing of 20 Zyn products following an extensive scientific review.
Matthew Farrelly, director of the Office of Science in the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products, noted in the FDA's announcement about Zyn's marketing approval that "the data show that these nicotine pouch products" are "benefiting adults who use cigarettes and/or smokeless tobacco products and completely switch to these products."
Now the company is adding a $600 million plant in Aurora, Colorado, to boost production.
The big question: Will the Trump administration be friendly to nicotine pouches?
So far the new leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services and the FDA have said little about their approach to tobacco and nicotine product regulation.
An HHS spokesperson recently told Axios that the FDA's "position is centered on reducing the harm caused by nicotine addiction — particularly through combustible tobacco products like cigarettes — while exploring strategies to make less harmful alternatives available to adults who are trying to quit smoking."
"Nicotine itself, while addictive, is not the primary cause of smoking-related disease and death. Those are caused by the thousands of harmful chemicals in combustible tobacco," the spokesperson said.
The FDA is "working to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes to minimally addictive or non-addictive levels, aiming to prevent youth initiation and help current smokers quit."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
5 hours ago
- Axios
A majority of North Carolinians oppose cutting federal funding for research, poll finds
Nearly 60% of North Carolinians oppose large-scale federal funding cuts to medical research, a new survey has found. Why it matters: The Trump administration has proposed sweeping cuts to federal research funding, including $20 billion from the National Institutes of Health. That could have significant ramifications in North Carolina, where Duke University and UNC-Chapel Hill are among the largest recipients of research funding from the NIH. Already, the Trump administration has tried to change how the federal government covers indirect costs for research, which could lead to large funding decreases in the Triangle. However, that decision has been stopped in the courts. Between the lines: The poll was commissioned by United for Cures, a group backed by UsAgainstAlzheimer's, which opposes the Trump administration's cuts to the NIH. The poll was conducted by the firm Public Opinion Strategies, which surveyed 500 registered voters in North Carolina between June 23-26. Zoom in: Of the survey respondents who said they oppose cutting medical research, 48% said they strongly opposed it, according to Public Opinion Strategies. A large majority of those opposed to the cuts say they are worried about research being cut for cancer treatments and prevention. Many of the respondents said the cuts could affect how they vote, with 56% saying they would be less likely to vote for a member of Congress who voted for the cuts. Among self-described moderate voters, that share reaches 63%. On the other side, 33% of respondents said they favored cutting funding for medical research, and 25% said they would be more likely to vote for a member of Congress who voted for the cuts.
Forbes
19 hours ago
- Forbes
What Older Adults Need To Know About Trump's Changes To Medicare
Since Congress passed the big tax and spending bill on July 3, most observers have focused their attention on its cuts to Medicaid. But the Trump Administration is quietly making big changes to Medicare, which insures nearly 70 million seniors and younger people with disabilities. Just in time for the program's 60th anniversary. Most direct changes are aimed at providers such as doctors, hospitals, home health agencies, nursing homes, and hospices. But the biggest immediate impact on Medicare costs may come from President Trump's worldwide tariff increases and his promised mass deportations of immigrants. Combined, these direct and indirect changes could alter the way older adults receive their health care, potentially in significant ways, despite President Trump's repeated promises that he would not touch Medicare. The Administration seems to be framing its actions to achieve three goals—to reduce fraud, increase efficiency, and refocus care on disease prevention. But some changes will increase costs and limit access to care. Here are some of Trump's Medicare initiatives: Prior authorization for original Medicare. Medicare Advantage managed care plans have come under intense scrutiny, including from the Trump Administration, for routinely demanding prior approval for many treatments. But now, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will begin requiring prior authorization for certain procedures under traditional Medicare. It announced a six-year, six-state pilot program to require physicians to get an OK for 17 treatments and procedures. The Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) initiative will be tested in New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, and Washington, and cover procedures such as certain back surgeries, some steroid injections for pain, knee arthroscopies for osteoarthritis, and use of certain artificial skin grafts. CMS says they all "are vulnerable to fraud, waste and abuse." The skin substitute story is especially interesting. The Biden Administration attempted to crack down on overuse of the product. Trump blasted that move in March and shelved the Biden rules. Now, the president has reversed course: His Administration will require prior approval before Medicare pays for the artificial skin. CMS says it will use AI for authorizations, although it insists humans will review all decisions. Nursing Homes. Medicare pays for post-acute care and rehab in skilled nursing facilities, usually after someone has been discharged from a hospital. CMS proposed increasing 2026 Medicare SNF payments by 2.8 percent. And the 2025 budget bill effectively repealed Biden's minimum staffing rules for nursing homes. Trump also issued an executive order in January calling for substantial deregulation of nursing homes and other Medicare providers. Look for CMS to roll back Biden rules on ownership transparency and quality and safety reporting. Home Care: CMS proposed cutting by 6.4 percent, or more than $1 billion, 2026 Medicare payments to home health agencies. Those cuts have generated opposition even from congressional Republicans. At the same time, the Labor Department proposed allowing home care agencies to pay workers less than the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr and exempting them from having to pay for overtime unless their states explicitly require it. The new rules would overturn Obama Administration policies. Immigration. Trump's promised mass deportations will further tighten the supply of direct care workers, both for facility- and home-based care. That inevitably will drive up costs for Medicare and consumers. Medicare Savings Programs. The budget bill made it tougher for low-income seniors to enroll in MSPs, which help cover premiums and other out-of-pocket Medicare costs. More Financial Risk: For years, original Medicare has used both carrots and sticks to nudge doctors and health systems away from volume-based payments and towards payment for good outcomes rather than for the number of procedures. This shift has been happening for well over a decade, but look for the Administration to accelerate the trend. CMS is likely to increase both penalties and rewards for doctors, nursing homes, home health agencies, physical and occupational therapists, and other providers. GUIDE: One Biden-era initiative that appears to have strong support in the Trump Administration is the new GUIDE program, where Medicare pays extra to providers who offer care navigation and family supports for patients with dementia. The program began serving patients this month. However, some Trump advisors favor one significant change: Consistent with efforts to add financial risk to providers more broadly, they may penalize GUIDE providers who can't show they are improving outcomes for participating patients. Hospitals: Today, Medicare generally pays more for hospital-run outpatient care than for the same services provided by community physicians or physician-run surgical centers. Studies show the quality of care is no different, though hospitals say the extra payments are necessary to reflect their higher costs. Prior administrations have failed to lower payments for hospital-based outpatient care. Now, the Trump Administration has proposed increasing its payments to hospitals for outpatient services by about $8 billion, or 2.4 percent, which hospitals insist is inadequate. And at the same time, it would phase out its list of procedures that only can be done on an inpatient basis, a step that would open the door to more surgeries in independent surgical centers. The Administration also proposed limiting visits to hospital-owned, off-campus providers. Many of these efforts to shift to site-neutral payment have bipartisan support in Congress. Hospice: Medicare pays most hospice costs but critics say the financing structure opens the door to abuse. Trump's director of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Mehmet Oz, has hinted he will crack down on what he calls 'widespread fraud' in hospice. Tariffs. More than 40 percent of branded drugs and their ingredients are imported from the European Union, and it appears that most will now be subject to Trump's 15 percent tariff. Nearly 90 percent of generic drugs and their ingredients are imported from overseas, with the largest share from India. Trump announced a 25 percent import tax on goods from that country. These taxes inevitably will increase Medicare's pharmaceutical costs, which will drive up both drug prices and premiums for drug insurance. Similarly, the US imported more than $300 billion in medical equipment in 2022, a third from China, Germany, and Switzerland. Tariffs on those goods will raise their prices, as well as Medicare premiums. Despite Trump's repeated promises, his administration already is making significant changes to Medicare.
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
Bipartisan Senate price transparency bill can fix US health care
In the aftermath of Republicans' divisive reconciliation bill, Congress has the opportunity to come together and pass bipartisan legislation to address one of the nation's biggest problems: The broken health care system. Approximately 100 million Americans have health care debt, and one-quarter of insured families avoid care each year due to unknown costs. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act, recently introduced by Sens. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) and John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), can reverse runaway health care costs that are placing a tremendous burden on American families by empowering them to compare and save. Since 2000, hospital prices have increased by 257 percent, which explains why the growth rate in health insurance premiums has outstripped workers' earnings by a ratio of almost 3 to 1 over this timeframe. The Marshall-Hickenlooper bill gives employers and patients the upfront price information they need to protect themselves from overcharges and choose affordable care. It requires the publication of actual prices, including discounted cash and negotiated insurance rates, not estimates, throughout the health care system. And it requires insurers to give patients an advanced explanation of benefits —a breakdown of costs, including their out-of-pocket responsibility — before care is delivered. I joined a letter signed by 40 leading health economists calling on senators to co-sponsor and quickly pass this crucial legislation. Economists understand actual prices are essential to functioning marketplaces that generate fair-market costs. Under the opaque status quo, consumers are essentially required to pay for care with the equivalent of a blank check, giving hospitals and health insurers tremendous market power to overcharge and profiteer. Hidden prices result in wide cost variations for the same care, a sign of market failure. Recent research I conducted for Rice University's Baker Center reveals that mean outpatient hospital prices in Houston vary by nearly 200 percent for the same insurer. A recent study in Health Affairs Scholar shows that colonoscopy rates can vary by seven times for those with the same health coverage. Price transparency corrects this information asymmetry between consumers and providers, putting downward and convergent pressure on prices. It fosters competition and returns excessive health industry profits to patients, businesses, unions, school districts and workers where they belong. Redirecting funds from the health care industrial complex back to the private economy can create an enormous economic stimulus. Employers and employees especially stand to benefit. The average employer-sponsored family health insurance plan now costs $24,000 per year, with workers bearing the majority of the cost through premium deductions and lower wages. One analysis found that about the same amount of employee compensation growth since 2000 has gone to premium costs as to paychecks. Transparency empowers employers to steer workers to high-value care, reducing premium costs and increasing take-home pay. The Marshall-Hickenlooper bill also gives employers access to their claims data and reveals the contractual relationships of their health plan administrators, allowing them to remedy overbilling and spread pricing. My research suggests that lowering annual premiums by just $1,373 per employee can boost the profitability of retail businesses by an average of 12.4 percent. You don't need to be an economist to understand that upfront prices are needed to avoid overcharges and shop for affordable care and coverage. But economists can speak to the significant impact of price transparency on business earnings, worker paychecks and economic dynamism. Actual prices, as required by the Marshall-Hickenlooper bill, can restore affordability, accountability and trust to American health care. That's something people of all political persuasions can support.
