Abstract:
Smokeless tobacco is tobacco or a tobacco product that is used by means other than smoking
which implies use of unburned tobacco in the finished products. These products are intended to
be used orally, sucked, chewed, gargled or applied to the gums or tooth, while fire tobacco
mixtures are usually inhaled into the nostrils. Chewing tobacco is a risk in getting oral cancers
and pre-cancers. Other health risks of chewing tobacco include gum disease, tooth decay and
tooth loss, and possible links to other cancers and cardiovascular disease. Informal observations
reveal an increase in use of smokeless tobacco among youth and adolescence. Studies or health
programs related to smokeless tobacco in Sri Lanka is scarce. This study attempted to explore
factors associated with smokeless tobacco use among urban communities in Sri Lanka. Study
design was qualitative in nature. Subjects / sample were selected based on snow ball sampling
method. The study was conducted in Colombo district. Fourteen in-depth Interviews (n=14,
including 8 males and 6 females) were conducted to collect data. Inquiries were made with
regard to factors effecting initiation and continuing smokeless tobacco (Here, unseen
determinant factors were especially taken into consideration). Saturation method was the
guiding method of data collection and data were analyzed through framework analyzing
method. The study found out the following factors associated with smokeless tobacco use
among urban communities in Sri Lanka; Perceptions (‘Being with the gang’, as a youth style,
Group action – Ganja Set, Pampara Set, Hanz Set), Expectancies (forget problems, keep the
energy, and escape from the loneliness, to gain attraction, to gain pleasure, to keep wake up at
night), distributors do it secretly acting as if they are engaged in other things, compare to other
substitutions this is cheap, chemical effect cannot be seen by outsiders compared to other drugs,
carelessness of parents, lack of knowledge about harmfulness of the product, peers – (not to be
stigma, financial support), and certain qualities of the product (no bad smell). The study
recommended an effective Health Promotion intervention to address these determinant factors.
