A new scientific pilot study suggests that so-called ”sting-free” nicotine pouches, designed with a protective barrier against the oral mucosa, can reduce irritation and snus-related changes in the mouth. However, the results are still limited and the research is in its infancy.
The new, recent study has been published in the scientific journal ”Acta Odontologica Scandinavica” and focuses on how oral health is affected when users switch from traditional snus or regular nicotine pouches to a so-called barrier nicotine pouch. The product under investigation is called ”Stingfree Strong Blue Mint” and is a nicotine pouch with a protective biofilm on one side of the pouch, which is intended to reduce direct contact with the gums. The blue side of the pouch is placed against the gums while the white side releases flavour and nicotine, which the manufacturer claims can reduce irritation.
Stingfree AB, the company behind the product, is based in Sweden and was founded by snuffer and Lidinge Islander Bengt Wiberg. The idea for stingfree came after his dentist advised him to avoid snuff because of irritation in his mouth. Wiberg has experimented with different ways to reduce gum pain, and this eventually became the basis for the later patented technology. Today, he runs Stingfree together with his son in a premises on Lidingö in Stockholm.
Dentists as guinea pigs
The study involved 23 participants, all dentists, who used snus or nicotine pouches daily. Over a period of five weeks, they replaced their regular products with the barrier nicotine pouch. Changes in the oral mucosa were then documented through self-reporting and photographs that were later assessed by external experts.
According to the results, the prevalence of snus-related changes clearly decreased over the study period. The proportion of participants reporting irritation or visible lesions in the mouth dropped significantly, and signs of gingivitis completely disappeared in participants over the five weeks.
The researchers say that this suggests that the barrier construction may have a protective effect on the oral mucosa compared to more traditional products. At the same time, they emphasise that the study is designed as a pilot study and therefore cannot be used for far-reaching conclusions.
Limited data
The study points out that the sample size is small and the participant group is rather narrow. All subjects are dentists, which means that the group is neither randomly selected nor representative of the broad population of snus and nicotine users. Much of the data is also based on the participants' own assessments of their oral health, which the researchers themselves identify as a weakness of the study. Nevertheless, the results are so positive in terms of oral health that they may point the way for further larger and independent studies.
The research team behind the study consists of dental researchers and clinicians working at universities and research centres in Italy, the UK and elsewhere. The co-authors also include the Vejpkollen acquaintance, Swedish researcher Karl Fagerström, who has been a well-known profile in tobacco and nicotine research for several decades.
Karl Fagerström has previously worked at the Karolinska Institute and has been involved in the development of established tools for measuring nicotine dependence. As Vejpkollen has written about previously, in recent years he has often highlighted harm reduction and smokeless nicotine products as a possible public health pathway, which has made him both influential and controversial in the Swedish nicotine debate.
Prudent conclusions
The study is published in an established, peer-reviewed journal of dentistry. At the same time, it is clear that the product tested was provided by the manufacturer, who naturally has a commercial interest in positive results. However, the researchers disclose this in the study and stress that the results should be interpreted with caution until they can be confirmed in larger, independent and randomised studies.
To summarise, the study shows possible positive effects on oral health when using a barrier nicotine pouch, but that the scientific support is currently limited. The researchers themselves describe the results as preliminary and emphasise the need for further research before the technology can be considered a safer option from a broader public health perspective.
Interesting study, even if it is small. However, the fact that signs of gingivitis completely disappeared over five weeks is quite remarkable, even in a pilot study. Do you know if there are already plans for a larger, independent and randomised follow-up study?
Thank you for your comments. The pilot study was completely independent and has been peer-reviewed and published in Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 2025 and cited in three subsequent scientific studies. Our small start-up company Stingfree AB hopes that some larger university will take on a larger study with more participants but nothing clear yet. The strength of the study is that the subjects were professional snus-using dentists and that the reduction in the degree of damage regarding oral lesions in the oral mucosa with 99.98% statistical significance is due to the blue protective barrier on the prills (p = 00002). The number of snus-using dentists with gingivitis before switching to Stingfreesnus.se was only 3 but after 5 weeks there were none left. Regards / Bengt Wiberg the inventor and patent holder of the Stingfree Protex® technology. ps. for those who snuff or are a dentist or dental hygienist, I recommend this great article on snus, white snus and oral health in Jan 2026. https://www.2firsts.com/news/2firsts-interview–bengt-wiberg-why-the-oral-health-risks-of-nicotine-pouches-merit-further-study