Baseball and the Slow Death of Chewing Tobacco

Alcohol is dangerous when used illegally.

 

I'm fine if tobacco can stays, as long as the nicotine is just removed. We have a long history of banning harmful ingestible chemicals, I'm not sure why this is treated differently. If nicotine were removed, tobacco would be on more square footing with alcohol, as booze is something that only a small percentage of people are addicted to while nearly everyone who uses tobacco is addicted.

Removing nicotine may make it less likely players will use tobacco, but nicotine is not what causes cancer. It's all the other toxic stuff in tobacco that does that.

That was obviously hyperbole, but you knew that.

The same arguments you make for banning tobacco can be made for banning booze. Immediate impact, long term health concerns, fan interaction. Or is that not correct?

Smokeless tobacco TO THIS DAY has been laced with incredibly harmful chemicals and even poisons. While each state has their own laws for local brewers, the testing required to sell nationally, both initially and ongoing, with alcohol ensures you are getting a reputable product that is what the label says that it is. You are literally gambling with your life every time you put a single dip in, let alone make it a habit. To give an idea, I had a college friend who went to work with Pinkerton Tobacco Company (who make Red Man), and he left there to create his own supplement company. Most know how minimally-regulated the supplement industry is, but he's stated before that it'd be easier for him to get a new flavor of Red Man on the market than to put a new type of protein supplement on the market. The tobacco lobby put in some incredibly loose regulations on their products for years, and while the products may be finding fewer and fewer spots that they can be used publicly, the regulations on what those products can contain have never been approached in all of the movement to limit/ban tobacco products.

Never got into dip myself but i smoked for 15 years and quit a couple of years ago in my late 30's.  Man i'm glad i stopped.  I feel so much better and breath so much better instead of huffing and puffing whenever i do anything outdoors.  Lung cancer due to smoking and mouth or lip cancer due to dipping ain't no joke.

Also want to add that I don't have a problem with sports franchises taking a harder stance against smoking and dipping, meanwhile encouraging users to quit. It's not a matter of "IF" it's "WHEN" you eventually get cancer and then a roll of the dice whether or not you die. I've had multiple relatives pass away from lung cancer and I admit I was stubborn and dumb to do it myself. Encouraging our youth NOT to smoke and dip should be a high priority among-st us all, especially considering how difficult it is to quit. I did it cold turkey but a lot of people can't do that and Chantix has bad side effects for many.   

This is a tough one, and an interesting discussion. 

I chewed for about 10 years, when I was playing college ball and coaching. I never once was influenced by MLB players who chewed. I did it because my arm was sore and it helped me loosen up. 

If MLB bans smokeless tobacco, it probably wouldn't stop that many people from doing it on their own time. If it does help to make a % of people stop using it, they will probably find a different vice. 

I'm not saying I would be against a ban. I am saying MLB could have more influence by heavily advertising against smokeless tobacco and its harmful effects within the stadiums. 

I think we may be giving kids too much credit paying attention to what's inside a baseball player's mouth. Growing up I never noticed Tony Gwynn and other baseball players were using chew on the field.

If we want to deter kids from using chew play the summer carnival scene from The Sandlot on an endless loop.

You seriously didn't notice? I'm betting you did notice but just don't remember. Dipping was a huge part of baseball culture which is why this topic was started. If you seriously don't remember, send a question to Bert or Dan and I'm sure they'll gladly talk about it on the air for you.

I can only imagine how disgusting dugouts were until recently. Being the janitor who had to mop all of the dip spit off the floor and empty the spit buckets after each game would have been a terrible job.

True, players can do whatever they want to do at home. When Manfred talks about banning it, he's not talking about what players do on their free time. Can you think of many workplaces in 2019 that are supportive of dipping while at work? Yes, when I lived in Austin there was always a country boy who would keep his little styrofoam cup with him all the time to spit in at work. This was certainly the minority, though.

According to the collective bargaining agreement, that's not actually true. Otherwise owners would've banned it a long time ago. Either way, we need to stop being such children. It's not our job to protect other people from themselves. 

CBA is a good point.

You think they're losing a lot of customers through the tobacco ban? I'm guessing they make money from the stadium ban -- tobacco users rate of attendance probably doesn't fall off much (if at all), and they're probably more likely to purchase concessions if they can't use tobacco. 

 

 

You think MLB isn't motivated by money too? The insurance costs could be considerable. Remember, they're paying for lifetime insurance for every guy who's ever suited up in an MLB uniform. When that populations chews at 5x the rate of the normal population, the extra premium costs are going to add up.

 

Obviously we don't know how they rank the reasons, but if they save money AND get good PR, I wouldn't say they're doing it just to feel good about themselves.

No no no...My point was slightly tongue in cheek but I meant teams stand to earn more from healthy repeat customers over time rather than those suffering from heart disease. Individuals with chronic health aliments aren't frequenting events at the same rate as those without them, and they certainly aren't matching lifespans either. We're speaking in extreme generalities here but a long term outlook is rosier if teams aren't feeding (literally) into the #1 affliction the US suffers from. 

I think I've made the exact opposite contention. We're talking about guys who beat the hell out of their bodies over a short period of time. Even if it's 5X the normal usage rate, that still a small percentage of total players. We're speculating but I'd wager that MLB spends much more on chronic physical aliments than they do on cancer linked directly to chewing. Sure, they might save a little $, but as I said before there are more impactful ways of saving $ and protecting the product/revenue that would be just as easy to implement. I think the fact that they aren't addressed says a lot about the motivation behind banning tobacco. 

How many adults just happen to pick up chew? I don't care what Buxton does, especially when he's at home. It's the 16-year-olds watching him that are making that decision and 16-year-olds make 5 poor decision for every 1 good decision.

 

He doesn't have to be a role model, but if he doesn't want to do the right thing by not perpetuating the idea that ballplayers have to chew, then I have no problem if someone else tells him he can't do it at the ballpark anymore.

I can't give an exact number but I'd guess a fair amount. I can't imagine it's much different than something like drinking, where some start in high school and others wait until they're out of the house/adults. 

Buxton isn't responsible for random teenagers. I've always pushed back against the notion that baseball players are responsible for those watching, and I probably always will. Those kids have parents or other role models in their lives. It isn't Buxton's duty to parent strangers through a tv screen. He isn't perpetuating any idea. He's not endorsing or condemning the use of tobacco. He's making a personal choice, and it's one he should be allowed to make. I don't chew, and I don't have particularly strong feelings about it being banned either. If MLB decides they don't want their employees doing it, then they have the right to implement that rule, but until then players shouldn't be shamed for opting to use a substance that's within their rights. 

Wouldn’t a product like big league chew, even though it’s obviously gum, do more to influence kids than a player actually doing it in a game? That’s probably the only reason I even knew what chew was at an early age and I’ve always been a huge baseball fan.

Also, dugouts are still disgusting, but mostly because the players just throw their trash wherever the want to, except of course for the garbage can. Take a look at a dugout floor next time you watch a game. Some role models!

Sure. And "Big League Chew" existed because baseball players were known to use chewing tobacco. It was invented solely so children could pretend to be baseball players.