Category: Harm Reduction

  • Confusion About Alternatives Preventing Cessation

    Confusion About Alternatives Preventing Cessation

    Photo: kues1

    Confusion about smokefree alternatives is preventing many smokers from quitting smoking according to a global survey, reports Arab News.

    Commissioned by Philip Morris International and conducted by Povaddo, the study surveyed nearly 30,000 people in 26 countries. The researchers found that many adult smokers remain unaware that alternatives to cigarettes exist, are unable to access them, or are confused by conflicting information that prevents them from making an informed choice.

    The survey showed that despite the science backing up smokefree alternatives, there was public confusion surrounding these products, such as heated tobacco products or e-cigarettes.

    Thirty-three percent of the respondents cited a lack of information about how these products differ from cigarettes and 35 percent said they were unsure about the science behind these new products.

    The survey found that 32 percent of smokers have easier access to cigarettes and so don’t switch to alternatives.

    “The findings of the survey show there is confusion about smokefree products. For those adults who would otherwise continue to smoke cigarettes, having access to evidence-based information about smoke-free products is critical,” said Tarkan Demirbas, area vice-president for the Middle East at PMI.

     According to the World Health Organization, there are more than 1 billion smokers in the world today, and this number is expected to stay steady until 2025.

  • Filipino Delegate Praised For Courage, Bravery at COP9

    Filipino Delegate Praised For Courage, Bravery at COP9

    Teodoro Locsin Jr.
    (Photo: Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs)

    Tobacco harm reduction (THR) advocates and vapers have praised Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr. for his insistence at the ninth Conference of the Parties (COP9) that the latest scientific information must be considered to solve the global smoking problem.

    “We salute his bravery at COP9 for promoting the Philippines’ balanced and evidence-based approach to safer nicotine products,” said Peter Dator, president of consumer group Vapers PH and Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA) member. “Opponents and officials have since done their best to discredit Secretary Locsin and disrespect our country’s democracy and sovereignty, but they have failed badly.”

    “In a world where smoking causes eight million deaths every year, Secretary Locsin has done everyone a huge favor,” said Nancy Loucas, executive coordinator of CAPHRA. “Telling COP9 about the success of ‘far less harmful novel tobacco products’ and the Philippine government’s political support for them was music to the ears of the millions who’ve successful quit deadly cigarettes via vaping.”

    We salute his bravery at COP9 for promoting the Philippines’ balanced and evidence-based approach to safer nicotine products.

    Loucas organized a global livestream called sCOPe during COP9, featuring leading THR experts and consumer advocates. The livestream added to the increasing pressure on the WHO to embrace safer nicotine products.

    “How can we trust the WHO and the FCTC when they are afraid of science? In this age of fake news and alternative facts, it is important for governments to take a stand for the facts and know how to sift through the propaganda. This is what Secretary Locsin did at COP9, and I join the Philippine Cabinet and Congress in commending his actions,” said Dator.

    Earlier, Locsin had drawn fire from the Philippines Department of Health for stating that tobacco products were a “source of good through taxation” for the Philippines

    The health department said that it was misleading to praise the tobacco industry’s role in raising tax revenues. In 2011, the cost of tobacco-related diseases was estimated at PHP177 billion ($3.54 billion) annually, the agency noted. This was seven times higher than the PHP25.9 billion collected in taxes from tobacco products.

  • More Calls for Tobacco Harm Reduction Ahead of COP9

    More Calls for Tobacco Harm Reduction Ahead of COP9

    Photo: andriano_cz

    Activists continue to urge participants in the ninth Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control to seriously consider tobacco harm reduction in their deliberations.

    COP9 will take place Nov. 8-13 online. During the convention, delegates will debate measures to reduce smoking-related death and disease. To the frustration of many tobacco harm reduction proponents, the WHO has been suspicious of vaping and other reduced-risk products, viewing them as an industry tool to keep consumers hooked on nicotine.

    “Tobacco harm reduction is a chance for smokers to switch from an extremely harmful to a significantly less harmful alternative,” the Independent European Vape Alliance (IEVA) wrote in a statement ahead of the gathering.

    We would like the WHO, together with other representatives from politics and science, to develop a targeted strategy for reducing the damage caused by smoking.

    “Unfortunately, the WHO has lost sight of this in recent years. But it is not too late to repent. It must focus on the future of millions of smokers worldwide—a future that is much brighter should they switch to vaping—rather than its own counterproductive ‘quit-or-die’ dogma.”

    “As a European association that is independent of the tobacco industry, we would like the WHO, together with other representatives from politics and science, to develop a targeted strategy for reducing the damage caused by smoking. Of course we as an industry are ready for this critical dialogue,” said Dustin Dahlmann, president of IEVA.

    “The World Health Organization’s failure to declare a global emergency in 2020 [in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic] will be repeated in 2021 when the WHO will likely abandon international tobacco harm reduction efforts and condemn millions of smokers to an early death,” said Nancy Loucas, a leading consumer advocate based in New Zealand.

    The WHO got it totally wrong on Covid-19, and it’s no surprise they’ve also got it very wrong with safer nicotine products such as vaping.

    “The WHO got it totally wrong on Covid-19, and it’s no surprise they’ve also got it very wrong with safer nicotine products such as vaping,” she added. “As an ex-smoker, vaping has improved my health and arguably saved my life, yet the WHO and its sponsor American Michael Bloomberg have pressured countries like mine to ban it.”

    On Oct. 18, 100 international health experts sent a public letter urging the COP9 parties to take a more positive stance on tobacco harm reduction. That same month, the Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction (GSTHR) released a report urging the WHO to update its policies, which the GSTHR described as “frozen in time” as they dated from before the arrival on the market of many less-harmful nicotine delivery devices.

    A group of tobacco harm reduction experts will hold a round-the-clock broadcasting event Nov. 8-12, to challenge and scrutinize COP9, which will take placed behind closed doors.

  • A Tale of Two COPs

    A Tale of Two COPs

    Image: Tobacco Reporter archive

    This year, the first two weeks of November will witness two COPs (Conference of Parties), large policy gatherings aimed at moving the needle on ratified global U.N.-related conventions. Both have to do with health—individual, population and the planet’s health. Yet, one COP is attracting the leaders of the developed world as well as developing worlds in Glasgow, United Kingdom, along with another 20,000-odd stakeholders. The other COP will be held virtually and quietly from its secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland.

    The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) secretariat is tasked with supporting the global response to the threat from climate change. With 197 members, the UNFCCC has a near universal coverage. The 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) Glasgow was kicked off on Oct. 31 with great fanfare, high expectations and drama befitting a Hollywood premiere—e.g., Greta Thunberg arrived on a “climate train,” a test in patience and endurance for Greta, her 150 fellow passengers, the media and the climate activists’ mob at Glasgow Central.

    Throughout the course of these two weeks of negotiations, haggling and posturing, the best possible outcome from COP26 could be that all countries commit to keeping global warming limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius. That calls for some serious re-engineering of human behavior and entire societies. Millions of conventional jobs and livelihoods will be lost, millions more potentially created in the new green economy. Some would argue (and justify): Desperate times call for desperate action. Green economy advocates and solution providers, including transforming oil companies and automobile manufacturers, are in full attendance at the summit and are missing no photo-op to burnish their green credentials.

    The UN climate change conference will consider the input of the manufacturers it seeks to regulate, many of which are eager to show how they can be part of the solution. (Photo: adrian_ilie825)

    The other COP, of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), created by the U.N.’s World Health Organization and run by the FCTC secretariat, follows a completely different tack. It is notionally intended for addressing the harms to society and the world due to risky forms of smoked (cigarettes, bidis, cigars) and smokeless (khaini, gutkha, zarda, etc.) tobacco products that over a billion people consume today. The FCTC is ratified by most of the countries in the world (the USA and Indonesia being notable exceptions), and the ninth Conference of Parties from Nov. 8–13 will see yet another biannual get together making decisions that affect 1.3 billion tobacco users, their families and millions from the tobacco supply chain globally. However, it is held behind closed doors, driven by health activists that simply see the tobacco industry as the problem and tobacco users as AstroTurf for the tobacco industry. Neither are allowed anywhere near the meeting nor are the lay media.

    The FCTC, in its simplest form, is a demand and supply reduction treaty, underpinned by tobacco harm reduction principles. Broadly, what this could mean in policy as well as practice is that those not currently using risky forms of tobacco products, especially children and young adults, should be disincentivized from initiation, and those currently using risky forms of tobacco should get the necessary help to quit. This may take the form of providing nicotine-replacement therapy, prescription medications and behavioral support. It could also mean that those involved in the supply chain, such as farmers and bidi worker women, should be given support to switch to alternative livelihoods.

    Sixteen years on from the ratification of the FCTC, great progress has been made in adopting parts of the treaty that relate to demand reduction by prevention of initiation into national regulations. Advertising campaigns, tax hikes, health warnings and packaging and sale restrictions have led to significant reductions in initiation, especially among youth. On the other hand, support to current users of risky forms of tobacco remains wanting, lacking innovation and largely under-funded.

    The nicotine in these products makes consumers dependent. The cancers, however, are caused by the toxic chemical mix in the smokeless products and from the smoke itself—but not the nicotine. Pharmaceutically licensed nicotine-replacement therapy products, in the form of gums and patches, are on the WHO’s model essential medicines list for tobacco dependence treatment. It is scientifically proven: Quitting risky forms of tobacco (cessation) is not easy; relapse is very common. The high retail price of the cessation products, poor availability and inadequate training of doctors in prescribing these cessation treatments means that current tobacco users miss out on any meaningful access and support.

    It is easy to point to the tobacco industry’s morally and ethically unacceptable behavior for most of the 20th century that led to the smoking epidemic globally, and even today, to the manufacturers of gutkha and pan masala in India who are fueling an oral cancer epidemic. Based on this historical context, the COP organizers exclude this industry from their deliberations. Sadly, that exclusion extends to consumers, effectively the current and future patients suffering from tobacco dependence.

    This raises a sticky question: Are the global public health community, led by the WHO’s FCTC signatories who meet every two years formally at the COP, simply giving up on the 1.3 billion current users of cigarettes, bidis, khaini and gutkha-like products, letting them die preventable premature deaths, for the want of adequate cessation products and support? Would public health not benefit from a wider range of innovative nicotine-replacement products, manufactured to high standards, regulated appropriately and specifically available as cessation aids for current adult users of risky tobacco products?

    In stark contrast to the climate change COP26, at this tobacco-related COP9, manufacturers of cleaner nicotine products (the “solution providers” to the problem) and consumers (the victims of the problem) will be glaringly absent. (Photo: lezinav)

    This COP season, it may be time to draw parallels between two very similar gatherings with diametrically opposite profiles and approaches. Climate change and tobacco-related harms—both are urgent issues facing humankind. Both are being addressed by global treaties and conventions. For both problems, a wide range of solutions are coming from old and new industries.

    In the case of climate change, the Teslas of the world lead the rally. Conventional fossil fuel giants such as BP (of the Gulf of Mexico spill fame) and Shell are not far behind either, showcasing their renewables’ commitment in every ESG communication. The Volkswagen emissions scandal (from less than five years ago) is distant memory, and the automobile industry is at the table, providing cleaner cars by “electrifying” their offerings.

    In tobacco cessation, underpinned by tobacco harm reduction principles, innovation came from a wide range of inventors and manufacturers globally: e-cigarettes from China, heated-tobacco products from Switzerland and the U.K., nicotine pouches from Sweden and cessation apps from the USA. Pharmaceutical manufacturers of conventional nicotine-replacement products and prescription medications are either withdrawing from the markets or not innovating any more. They have not made any visible effort to make their products available at affordable prices in the developing world—and there was never a huge hue and cry about that from public health.

    None of the new innovative products are a silver bullet but promise to provide cleaner, safer nicotine to the billion-plus current consumers of risky forms of tobacco. In countries such as the U.K. and USA, where regulators are informed by scientific evidence and risk assessment, these products are regulated and allowed. Slowly but surely, this will transform the nicotine use profile in these countries, no doubt saving millions of lives and billions of dollars in future health costs from tobacco-related diseases. In Japan, previously known for its high smoking incidence among men, nearly 30 percent of the cigarette market has been replaced by heated-tobacco devices. These devices are increasingly acknowledged for their reduced toxicant exposure vis-a-vis cigarettes. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized the sale of a specific brand of heated device, an e-cigarette and a Swedish snus-style smokeless tobacco product for their reduced toxicant exposure and potential to reduce tobacco-related harms. In the U.K., e-cigarettes are one of the many options of quitting tools supported by national health bodies.

    In stark contrast to the climate change COP26, at this tobacco-related COP9, manufacturers of cleaner nicotine products (the “solution providers” to the problem) and consumers (the victims of the problem) will be glaringly absent. In countries where regulators do not need the WHO’s blessings to make their own policies (the U.S., U.K. and increasingly the EU), innovation and better regulation will lead to a reversal of harms from risky 20th century tobacco products. In the developing world, including South Asia, the harms from tobacco will remain unabated in the absence of strong regulatory leadership and industry transformation.

    Whether or not we can manage to curb the global temperature rises to a maximum of 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2050, today’s direction of tobacco control as symbolized by COP9 will hinder access to safer nicotine alternatives to over 1.3 billion current users, 80 percent of whom live in developing countries, accounting for millions of preventable deaths in the next three decades.

  • Activists Hold Harm Reduction Rally Ahead of COP9

    Activists Hold Harm Reduction Rally Ahead of COP9

    Delegates from some of the International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organizations’ (INNCO) 37 member organizations in North and South America, Europe, Africa and Asia will gather in London on Nov. 8 to applaud the U.K. government’s evidence-based support for tobacco harm reduction and to highlight the importance of the ninth Conference of Parties of the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which begins that day.

    “We are ex-smokers who use safer nicotine to save our own lives,” said Charles Gardner, INNCO’s executive director, in a statement. “Many of us around the world face stigma for using nicotine, a drug that is no more harmful to health than caffeine. A global ‘misinfodemic’ is now spreading worldwide, and the only cure is to embrace evidence and evidence-based policies such as those in the United Kingdom.”

  • Doctors Reluctant to Prescribe E-Cigarettes

    Doctors Reluctant to Prescribe E-Cigarettes

    Photo: omphoto

    Not all doctors and nurses are enthusiastic about England’s intention to let physicians prescribe e-cigarettes to smokers, reports Daily Mail.

    A yet-to-be-published study, involving the University of Oxford, which interviewed 11 medical staff, found most struggled to advise long-term use of e-cigarettes because of concerns about unknown long-term effects.

    A survey commissioned by Cancer Research UK two years ago indicates that two in five English nurses and doctors would feel uncomfortable recommending e-cigarettes to smokers and one in six would never do so.

    General practitioners “find it difficult handing patients something which may cause them harm, even where e-cigarettes are far safer than cigarettes… They struggle to give people devices which may not be entirely safe or may perpetuate addiction to nicotine,” said Paul Aveyard, professor of behavioral medicine at the University of Oxford, who was involved in both pieces of research.

    Martin Marshall of the Royal College of general practitioners urged more investment in community smoking cessation centers. “’Vaping should only be seen as a way to give up smoking, with the intention to then give up vaping,” he said.

    Simon Capewell, professor of clinical epidemiology at Liverpool University, called the Department of Health plan for prescription e-cigarettes deeply worrying.

    “England is out on a dangerous limb,” he said. “Officials here have fallen for the exaggerated claims of the pro-vaping lobby, and are ignoring the health risks. The main claim, that e-cigarettes are a major aid to quitting, is wrong. If that were true, why would the multinational tobacco corporations be pushing vaping so hard?”

  • England Paves Way for E-Cig Prescriptions

    England Paves Way for E-Cig Prescriptions

    Photo: goodmanphoto

    Doctors in England may soon be prescribing e-cigarettes to help people stop smoking tobacco, according to a news story published by the Department of Health Social Care and the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is publishing updated guidance that paves the way for medicinally licensed e-cigarette products to be prescribed for smoking cessation.

    Manufacturers can approach the MHRA to submit their products to go through the same regulatory approvals process as other medicines available on the health service.

    This could mean England becomes the first country in the world to prescribe e-cigarettes licensed as a medical product.

    If a product receives MHRA approval, clinicians could then decide on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to prescribe an e-cigarette to NHS patients to help them quit smoking. It remains the case that non-smokers and children are strongly advised against using e-cigarettes.

    This country continues to be a global leader on healthcare, whether it’s our Covid-19 vaccine rollout saving lives or our innovative public health measures reducing people’s risk of serious illness.

    If a product receives MHRA approval, clinicians could then decide on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to prescribe an e-cigarette to NHS patients to help them quit smoking. It remains the case that non-smokers and children are strongly advised against using e-cigarettes.

    E-cigarettes contain nicotine and are not risk free, but expert reviews from the U.K. and U.S. have been clear that the regulated e-cigarettes are less harmful than smoking. A medicinally licensed e-cigarette would have to pass even more rigorous safety checks.

    Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature death and while rates are at record low levels in the U.K., there are still around 6.1 million smokers in England. There are also stark differences in rates across the country, with smoking rates in Blackpool (23.4 percent) and Kingston upon Hull (22.2 percent) poles apart from rates in wealthier areas such as Richmond upon Thames (8 percent).

    E-cigarettes were the most popular aid used by smokers trying to quit in England in 2020, according to the Department of Health and Social Care. E-cigarettes have been shown to be highly effective in supporting those trying to quit, with 27.2 percent of smokers using them compared with 18.2 percent using nicotine replacement therapy products such as patches and gum.

    Some of the highest success rates of those trying to quit smoking are among people using an e-cigarette to kick their addiction alongside local Stop Smoking services, with up to 68 percent successfully quitting in 2020 -2021.

    We fully welcome the news that the NHS in England is exploring opportunities to prescribe vaping products to help people quit smoking.

    “This country continues to be a global leader on healthcare, whether it’s our Covid-19 vaccine rollout saving lives or our innovative public health measures reducing people’s risk of serious illness,” said Health and Social Care Secretary Sajid Javid.

    “Opening the door to a licensed e-cigarette prescribed on the NHS has the potential to tackle the stark disparities in smoking rates across the country, helping people stop smoking wherever they live and whatever their background.”

    Vapor industry representative welcomed the prospect of e-cigarettes on prescription.

    “We fully welcome the news that the NHS in England is exploring opportunities to prescribe vaping products to help people quit smoking,” said Doug Mutter, director of VPZ, the U.K.’s largest vaping retailer with 157 stores throughout the country.

    “The pandemic has triggered an increase in smoking rates and the public health problem has been compounded by funding cuts for NHS stop smoking services and local support groups.

     “However this progressive and innovative approach being considered by the NHS in England has the potential to reverse this damage and bring new momentum to our ambitions of becoming a smoke free nation by 2030.”

    The government deserves huge praise for taking this bold decision to look more closely at the use of vaping when it comes to smoking cessation and for taking an evidence-based, science-led approach.

    “The government deserves huge praise for taking this bold decision to look more closely at the use of vaping when it comes to smoking cessation and for taking an evidence-based, science-led approach rather than the nonsensical anti-vaping, anti-harm reduction stance of some countries,” said John Dunne, Director General of the U.K. Vaping Industry Association.

    “This announcement by the Department for Health is just the latest in a long line of breakthroughs for those of us who for years have advocated vaping as the best and most effective method for people looking to quit smoking.”

  • WHO Urged to Embrace Tobacco Harm Reduction

    WHO Urged to Embrace Tobacco Harm Reduction

    The ninth Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) will operate under conditions of secrecy comparable to those of the U.N. Security Council, according to a new report by the Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction (GSTHR) titled, Fighting the Last War: The WHO and International Tobacco Control.

    The public and media are banned from attending all but one largely ceremonial opening plenary, yet millions will be affected by the decisions taken at COP9, which is scheduled to take place virtually Nov. 8–13.

    The report contends that current implementation of the FCTC is a global public health failure. In force since 2005, when there were 1.1 billion smokers around the world, the FCTC set out the principles of global tobacco control—to reduce the death and disease caused by smoking. In 2021, however, there are still 1.1 billion smokers worldwide and 8 million smoking-related deaths each year. What’s more, the number of smokers is predicted to rise, and the number of smoking-related deaths is set to top 1 billion this century.

    Change is urgently needed, and harm reduction for tobacco offers the opportunity for that change, according to the GSTHR.

    Fighting the Last War notes that while tobacco control policy has remained frozen in time, innovative noncombustible nicotine technology and supporting evidence have moved forward. Vaping devices, snus, nicotine pouches and heated-tobacco products are significantly safer than cigarettes as they deliver nicotine without combustion, according to the report’s authors. This, they argue, enables people who cannot or do not want to stop using nicotine to quit deadly smoking and switch to less risky products.

    “Just as delegates at COP26 will be discussing the world’s urgent need to stop fossil fuel combustion, the technology is now in place to ensure the end of the age of combustion for tobacco as well,” the GSTHR wrote in a press note. “A number of Parties to the FCTC, such as the United Kingdom and New Zealand, have successfully introduced tobacco harm reduction policies alongside their tobacco control regimes and have seen marked decreases in smoking rates.”

    When given accurate information about comparative risk, many smokers switch, the organization notes. Worldwide, the GSTHR estimated in 2020 that 98 million people worldwide were using safer nicotine products.

    The authors also point out that the concept of harm reduction is embedded in the WHO response to drug use and HIV/AIDS. It is explicitly named as the third pillar of tobacco control alongside demand and supply reduction in the FCTC. Yet the WHO has remained implacably opposed to harm reduction for tobacco and is increasingly viewed as having overseen a “mission creep,” which now sees international tobacco control setting its sights on prohibition for nicotine in all its forms.

    “There are concerning signs in published agenda and briefing papers that the FCTC secretariat and leadership continue to urge Parties against increasing access to, or even to prohibit, safer nicotine products,” the GSTHR wrote.

    Fighting the Last War considers the motivations—ideological, financial and historical—that have led to many global tobacco control practitioners becoming so hostile to what others see as the greatest potential public health advance in decades.

    The report argues that Parties to the FCTC need to seize back control of the COP meetings from the FCTC secretariat, which it says has become overly influential with little oversight. FCTC Parties should press for more evidence-based discussions, calling upon the widest breadth of scientific, clinical and epidemiological expertise on safer nicotine products and tobacco harm reduction, according to the authors. “This should include evidence from Parties that have implemented harm reduction policies, those involved in manufacturing safer nicotine products and the lived experience of consumers,” they wrote. “The establishment of a working group on tobacco harm reduction would offer a pragmatic route to move the FCTC toward a tobacco control regime fit for purpose in the 21st century.”

    “As global leaders prepare to make important pledges on climate change under the glare of the media spotlight at COP26, we urge them to demand more from their delegations inside the closed and unscrutinized rooms of COP9,” says Gerry Stimson, director of Knowledge-Action-Change and emeritus professor at Imperial College London. “Every day, more than one billion smokers are being failed by the international tobacco control regime. The age of combustion—for tobacco as for fossil fuels—must end.

    “Tobacco harm reduction offers new routes out for adult smokers. GSTHR estimates suggest that 98 million of them have already switched. At COP9, government delegations must seize back control and prevent the slide into outright nicotine prohibition that would see many return to smoking and many millions more never succeed in quitting.”

    “The fight to reduce eight million smoking-related deaths a year is now being actively undermined by the WHO and the international tobacco control establishment,” said report author Harry Shapiro. “Together, they are fighting the last war against the tobacco industry—to direct attention away from the evidence that safer nicotine products can make a significant contribution to reducing that death toll.”

    “If those who dominate the global tobacco control discourse were truly committed to public health imperatives, harm reduction principles and policies would be front and center,” said Ethan Nadelmann, founder of the Drug Policy Alliance. “This valuable report exposes the ways in which international institutions have turned their backs on scientific evidence and the human and political rights of hundreds of millions of people whose lives might be saved by safer nicotine products.”

    Fighting the Last War provides an insight into the dark arts of the WHO that many would find breathtaking and incomprehensible,” said Jeannie Cameron from JCIC Consulting. “It shows a concerning difference between the world’s preparations for COP26 on climate change and COP9 on tobacco. Governments need to stand up at COP9 to support tobacco harm reduction against the outdated views of the WHO.”

    The fight to reduce eight million smoking-related deaths a year is now being actively undermined by the WHO and the international tobacco control establishment. Together, they are fighting the last war against the tobacco industry—to direct attention away from the evidence that safer nicotine products can make a significant contribution to reducing that death toll.”

    “The challenge for lower and middle-income countries while fighting the last war and promoting real tobacco control is about two major issues,” said Nataliia Toropova from Healthy Initiatives. “Firstly, the current provisions of the WHO FCTC have not been properly implemented due to stretched government resources. Thus, smoking cessation programs are nonexistent, and adult smokers feel hopelessly stuck while making their numerous unsuccessful attempts to quit with no medical help or guidance provided. Secondly, the lack of a comprehensive harm reduction strategy is aggravated by a massive misinformation campaign about harm reduction products and a declared war on nicotine. Unless these two issues get tackled, unless the powerful voice of doctors becomes loud and gets heard, unless education and awareness building campaigns take place, no changes will occur, and this last war will be lost.”

  • Harm Reduction Activists to Broadcast During COP9

    Harm Reduction Activists to Broadcast During COP9

    Image: sCOPe
    Nancy Loucas

    A group of tobacco harm reduction experts will hold a round-the-clock broadcasting event Nov. 8-12, coinciding with the Ninth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the World health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).

    Dubbed “sCOPe,” or “streaming Consumers On Point everywhere,” the five-day livestream will be simulcast via YouTube and Facebook. Presenters and panelists will challenge and scrutinize COP9, questioning, for example, who is influencing and funding its efforts to demonize vaping.

    “Before the Covid-19 pandemic, consumers were planning to front up to COP in person and show media our increasing anger for being shut out, once again, from the proceedings,” said sCOPe organizer Nancy Loucas, executive coordinator of the Coalition of Asia Pacific Harm Reduction Advocates. “The FCTC’s decision to delay COP9 and host it exclusively online, with no discussions to be publicly released, meant consumers had to take alternative action. Hence, the development of sCOPe,”

    “sCOPe is our response to being excluded from the table, as the main stakeholders, of the discussion and decision-making process that directly impacts our health and our right to make informed decisions,” she said.

  • Health Leaders Urge Update of ‘Clearing the Smoke’ Report

    Health Leaders Urge Update of ‘Clearing the Smoke’ Report

    Forty-two public health leaders have signed onto a letter urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) to review and update the 20-year old Clearing the Smoke report so that it can address the evolved tobacco and nicotine marketplace.

    Two decades ago, the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine) issued its landmark report Clearing the Smoke—Assessing the Science Base for Tobacco Harm Reduction. The report had been compiled at the request of the FDA as it considered—even before Congress gave it the authority to do so—how best to regulate the growing tobacco and nicotine marketplace.

    The signatories of the letter point out that much has changed in the tobacco and nicotine marketplace since the report was first published. Science, technology and innovation have dramatically advanced over the past two decades. Consumers can now choose from a range of nicotine delivery products spanning the entire continuum of risk—from deadly combustible cigarettes on one hand to less-harmful noncombustible products such as snus, e-cigarettes and tobacco heating products.

    However, a slow product approval process means these products are not being made available to the public at a pace that would help significantly reduce the harms of cigarette smoking. What’s more, a lack of education efforts means consumers remain uninformed about the less-risky product choices available to them.

    The signatories maintain that an update of the Clearing the Smoke report will help put all stakeholders on a track that will collectively advance public health objectives. They believe that the National Academy of Medicine, which produced the original report, is the most appropriate body to undertake such a review on behalf of the CTP.

    The letter’s signatories include Scott Ballin, former vice president and legislative counsel of the American Heart Association; K. Michael Cummings, professor in the department of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Medical University of South Carolina; David Abrahams, professor in the department of social and behavioral science, at the College of Global Health at New York University; Aaron Biebert, former president and CEO of Clear Medical Solutions; Allan C. Erickson, former president for public education and tobacco control at the American Cancer Society; Ray Niaura, professor of public health global studies at New York University; and John R. Seffrin.