“The World Health Organization and its single most significant funder for anti-smoking efforts, U.S. billionaire Michael Bloomberg, have today sought to distract from years of failure under the WHO’s MPOWER tobacco control strategy by focusing instead on what U.K.-based public health agency Knowledge Action Change and other observers are calling a new ‘war on nicotine,’” KAC wrote in a press release.
“On publication of the WHO’s ‘eighth annual report on the global tobacco epidemic,’ the organization is continuing its misguided insistence that vapes (e-cigarettes), snus, nicotine pouches and heated tobacco devices, collectively known as safer nicotine products, are a threat,” KAC wrote. “This ignores the growing international, independent evidence that they offer millions of adult smokers the opportunity to quit deadly combustible tobacco.”
“The WHO’s self-congratulatory focus on strategy over outcomes indicates the lack of vision and ambition underpinning the international tobacco control establishment,” said Gerry Stimson, co-director of the Global State of Tobacco Harm Reduction (GSTHR) project and emeritus professor at Imperial College, London. “This report offers no surprises and no hope for the world’s 1.1 billion smokers, who need and deserve better.”
The GSTHR estimates that there are 68 million vapers worldwide, 20 million users of heated tobacco products and 10 million snus users. By comparison, there are 1.1 billion smokers.
A parliamentary group in the U.K. has released a report that criticizes anti-vaping groups funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies for being hostile to tobacco harm reduction (THR). The report also states that Bloomberg diminishes the rights of consumers and vapers in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as the Philippines.
Credit: Olrat
The UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Group for Vaping (APPG) said these anti-vaping “civil society observers” will be allowed to participate in the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Conference of the Parties 9 (FCTC COP 9) in November this year, concluding that the WHO continues to attempt to discredit UK’s science and policy approach to address the smoking problem, reports the Manila Bulletin. It said THR is a public health approach which is supposedly one of the original commitments of FCTC.
The APPG warned about the participation of The Union, a group funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies, as well as other anti-vaping non-government organizations in the FCTC COP 9 meeting in November. The APPG is asking the UK delegation to the FCTC COP9 meeting to ensure that its national experience and real-life evidence/data are reflected in the discussions within the WHO.
The APPG also wanted to ensure that the WHO would not move away from the fundamental objectives set forth by the FCTC given its original commitment to harm reduction—a public health approach being opposed by some influential non-government organizations. “The majority of NGOs listed as ‘Observers’ are hostile to the concept of tobacco harm reduction and thus the UK’s policy approach. For instance, ‘The Union’ has advocated a complete ban on e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products in low and middle-income countries, which are home to 80 percent of the world’s smokers,” the APPG said in the report.
You don’t have to be a doctor, or even play one on TV, to see the conflict: American healthcare policy that promotes taxpayer-funded needle exchanges for drug addicts, but opposes vaping as an alternative for smokers.
The Biden administration recently announced a robust plan to address the nation’s crippling opioid epidemic, which was responsible for 500,000 American deaths between 1999 and 2019. That harm reduction includes needle exchanges, long a controversial policy. In 1988, Congress barred the use of federal funding for needle exchange programs. In 2015, amid the growing opioid crisis, then-President Barack Obama signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, “which modified the restriction on use of federal funds for distributing sterile needles or syringes,” and allowed for funding to be used for other services, but not syringes.
The Biden administration plan mentions “harm reduction” a total of 12 times and hopes to “enhance” and “support” emerging harm reduction efforts. Although attempting to tackle the opioid epidemic is an admirable goal, the administration is doing an about-face in terms of adult access to all harm reduction products, and they’re not the only ones.
Rhode Island lawmakers recently held hearings on a series of bills that would ban flavored tobacco substitutes like vaping products. But those same Ocean State legislators held a floor session for the final vote on a bill that would establish “harm reduction centers.” A spirited debate took place for nearly an hour. Ultimately the measure passed by a vote of 62-9.
Harm reduction centers for opioid users are a worthwhile goal, but it is overwhelmingly hypocritical for lawmakers to support government funding those, while simultaneously blocking adult access to tobacco harm reduction products including e-cigarettes, heat-not-burn, and smokeless tobacco.
It is the smoke in combustible cigarettes that is responsible for the damage wrought by tobacco. Tobacco harm reduction products eliminate that smoke while allowing adult users to access nicotine, which in itself is not the harmful component of cigarettes. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has noted that it is the “mix of chemicals – not nicotine – that causes serious disease and death in tobacco users.”
The FDA currently regulates vapor products. But the agency, which fought so hard to regulate these products, has yet to approve a single premarket tobacco product application for any e-cigarette product. During a U.S. House oversight subcommittee meeting last month, lawmakers urged the agency to not approve any flavored e-cigarette product to “protect youth.”
In the Rhode Island House hearing, a spokesman for Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK) urged lawmakers to ban flavored tobacco and vapor products while supporting lawmakers’ efforts in increasing access to clean syringes and opioid antagonist medications, including methadone.
This makes no sense.
Is anyone arguing that more Americans should smoke? Or that health policy should promote smoking? Of course not, just as needle exchange advocates aren’t hoping more people will get hooked on heroin. It’s simply an acknowledgment of human nature, and an effort to reduce harm.
The infamous anti-tobacco and vaping crusader Michael Bloomberg similarly supports opioid harm reduction, but not tobacco harm reduction. A recent New York Times article interviewed the director of drug use initiatives at Vital Strategies, a Bloomberg-backed “philanthropic group.” The director noted that harm reduction programs help persons “stay safe and healthy and alive first and foremost.” Since 2016, Vital Strategies has worked in tandem with the World Health Organization to ban adult access to tobacco harm reduction products. In 2019, the organization highlighted India’s ban on e-cigarettes as a victory. Bloomberg himself has donated $160 million over a three-year period to “fight flavored e-cigarettes.”
In Rhode Island, the CTFK spokesperson noted that opioid harm reduction programs don’t create new users. That may be true, but e-cigarettes create former smokers by helping adults quit smoking. Moreover, they don’t cost taxpayers a dime, and as a harm reduction product, they help to reduce health care and other smoking-related costs.
The FDA has the ability to save millions of lives by approving tobacco harm reduction products. They shouldn’t let misinformed entities and people like CTFK and Michael Bloomberg stand in the way of science and common sense.
U.K.-based vaping retailer VPZ launched its pilot Vape Clinic on July 5 at its flagship Newbridge store. The company now plans to roll out the service across all its locations in the coming months. According to a press release, the vape clinic was begun to meet the growing demand for smoking cessation services.
Credit: VPZ
The moves comes as access to local stop smoking services and vaping retailers massively reduced during Covid-19 lockdowns, according to the release, adding that thousands of smokers were left without any services to help them quit smoking combustible cigarettes. Vape Clinic quit coaches will be specialists in helping smokers quit and advising the alternatives available. VPZ recently announced it had opened five stores since the end of lockdowns.
“With around 78,000 people in the U.K. dying from smoking year on year, and with many more living with debilitating smoking-related illnesses, the vape clinic has been designed to support the nation’s smokers quit for good,” the release states. “VPZ’s confidence in the success of the new Vape Clinic service is backed by its customer promise to provide a money back guarantee for hardware purchased and any unopened boxes of e-liquids and coils if customers are unable to make the switch to vaping entirely.”
Doug Mutter, director of VPZ, said the company is spearheading the fight against the nation’s No. 1 killer: smoking. He says that the “coaches” are trained and have expert knowledge and work to the individual needs of the customer. Many of the specialists are former smokers who have quit through vaping, so they understand the ups and downs of the journey.
“Smoking statistics are continuing to rise as the pandemic has triggered an increase in smoking rates and the public health problem has been compounded by funding cuts for National Health Service (NHS) stop smoking services and local support groups,” Mutter stated in the release. “Our new Vape Clinic concept is an investment to fill the void left by the loss of local NHS stop smoking services. We are so confident in the success of our new service that we are offering our customers a money back guarantee if they are unable to make the switch entirely.”
VPZ Vape Clinic is open 7 days a week, 10am to 5pm to all customers who book a free, 30-minute appointment here.
A new study by Queen Mary University of London, published in Addiction, shows that e-cigarettes are more effective in achieving long-term smoking reduction and cessation than nicotine-replacement therapies (NRT).
The study randomized 135 smokers who had been unable to stop smoking with conventional treatments into two groups—one received an eight-week supply of their choice of NRT and the other received an e-cigarette starter pack with instructions to purchase further e-liquids of their choice of strength and flavor. Products were accompanied by minimal behavioral support.
After six months, 27 percent of those in the e-cigarette group had reduced smoking by at least half compared to 6 percent in the NRT group. Of the participants in the e-cigarette group, 19 percent had stopped smoking altogether versus 3 percent in the NRT group.
“These results have important clinical implications for smokers who have previously been unable to stop smoking using conventional treatments,” said Katie Myers Smith, lead researcher and health psychologist, in Eurasia Review. “E-cigarettes should be recommended to smokers who have previously struggled to quit using other methods, particularly when there is limited behavioral support available.”
“This study shows e-cigarettes can be a very effective tool for people who want to stop smoking, including those who’ve tried to quit before,” said Michelle Mitchell, CEO of Cancer Research U.K., which funded the study. “And research so far shows that vaping is far less harmful than smoking. But e-cigarettes aren’t risk free, and we don’t yet know their long-term effects, so people who have never smoked shouldn’t use them.”
The message from the 30 speakers who spoke during the Global Forum on Nicotine (GFN) 2021 in person or online was clear. Policymakers in public health and tobacco control need to listen to both the science on tobacco harm reduction and the experiences of consumers who are benefiting from it every day. Ideology must be set aside to prioritize progress towards the common goal of ending smoking.
Credit: 1StunningART
Experts at the GFN were discussing an approach called tobacco harm reduction, in which people who cannot quit nicotine are encouraged to switch from dangerous combustible or oral products to safer nicotine products including vapes (e-cigarettes), pasteurized snus, non-tobacco nicotine pouches and heated tobacco products.
Compared to continued smoking, all are significantly less harmful to health. Gerry Stimson, Emeritus Professor at Imperial College London and a founder of the GFN, said during the conference that much of what she has seen and heard during the event was encouraging.
“It feels as though we’re on the right trajectory. Consumers all over the world are becoming aware of the opportunities offered by safer nicotine products, and innovations in the market will, I believe, lead to the eventual obsolescence of combustible cigarettes,” she said. “The question is how to speed up the process and scale up, so that tobacco harm reduction reaches all smokers, everywhere, as quickly as possible.”
Multiple panel discussions took in subjects ranging from safer nicotine product regulation, tobacco harm reduction in low-to-middle-income countries (LMICs), and orthodoxy and dissent in science. Speakers’ pre-recorded presentations for the panel sessions will remain available online at the conference website.
Three keynotes were delivered to honor the memory of professor Michael Russell, psychiatrist, research scientist and pioneer in the study of tobacco dependence and the development of treatments to help smokers quit. Russell’s observation in the British Medical Journal in 1976 that “people smoke for nicotine, but they die from the tar” remains highly influential within the field.
Fiona Patten MP and Leader of the Reason Party, Australia, opened proceedings with the first Michael Russell Keynote with her speech. Jon Fell, a founder of investment company Ash Park and Dr. Derek Yach, an anti-smoking advocate for more than 30 years, is the president of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, gave the other two keynote speeches. They all centered on harm reduction.
“In Australia, governments have consistently stated that drug use must be treated as a health issue not a criminal one. But when it comes to nicotine, they are actively making criminals out of users,” Patton said. “And not all nicotine users. Just those who are trying to end their deadly relationship with combustible tobacco. Most political parties refuse to accept donations from big tobacco – yet they still protect it. For decades they ignored the science about the dangers of smoking, but today they argue that there is not enough science to sanction alternative nicotine products.”
GFN does not receive any sponsorship from manufacturers, distributors or retailers of nicotine products, including pharmaceutical, electronic cigarette and tobacco companies. However, the conference operates an open door policy. Consumers, policymakers, academics, scientists and public health experts participate alongside representatives from manufacturers and distributors of safer nicotine products. The event organizers believe that dialogue and strategic engagement of all stakeholders involved in tobacco and nicotine use, control and production is the only way to effect true, sustainable change – both to industry practices and the public health outcomes related to smoking.
MPs from the U.K.’s two main political parties agree that vaping holds the key to Britain achieving its ambitious target to be a “smoke free” nation by 2030, according to a report by the U.K. Vaping Industry Association (UKIVA).
The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Smoking and Health presented its latest recommendations for a new Tobacco Control Plan (TCP) at Westminster yesterday.
Among its range of proposals to curb smoking prevalence in the U.K. were recommendations to expand the use of vaping based on the mounting “data and evidence” pointing to e-cigarettes’ efficacy in helping smokers to quit.
In a departure from most cross-party debates there was universal consensus that vaping should be a central part of any plan for the U.K. to meet its smoke free targets and save lives.
The first MP to bring vaping into the debate was Mary Glindon (Labour) who sits on the APPG on E-cigarettes.
She said “The forthcoming Tobacco Control Plan presents an enormous opportunity to cement the U.K. as the global leader in tobacco harm reduction.
“Having left the EU, the government must alongside the post implementation review of the Tobacco and Regulated Products Regulations (TRPR) set a clear direction for reducing smoking prevalence.
“To achieve its ambitions the forthcoming control plan must champion less harmful alternatives to smoking combustible tobacco, in particular the growing body of evidence showing vaping to be the most effective alternative for adult smokers looking to quit smoking.
“In its Blueprint for Better Regulation the U.K. Vaping Industry Association made recommendations to the Department for Health for consideration when reviewing TRPR, a process already under way.
“Those recommendations, many of which I support, could also be applied to the government’s TCP.
“One of those recommendations is effectively tackling increasing levels of misinformation and misperceptions about the relative harm of e-cigarettes versus tobacco.
“ASH data suggests millions of smokers could be dissuaded from switching to e-cigarettes because of incorrect views or confusion about vaping.
“To combat this the UKVIA recommends that the Department of Health launch an effective communications strategy including the introduction of approved health claims and switch messages displayed on vape devices and e-liquid packaging.
“It also recommends that medical professionals at local Stop Smoking services are supported with clinicians signposted to the latest clinical guidance and evidence about e-cigarettes.
“An evidence-based approach to smoking cessation must be adopted consistently by local services to support patients and their harm reduction journey—this is critical, considering the trials in NHS A&E departments.
“There should also be a review of regulations of nicotine in e-cigarettes to better understand the role nicotine plays in allowing e-cigarettes to be a satisfying alternative for adult smokers.
“For vaping to compete with combustible cigarettes and provide and alternative it must provide a comparably satisfying nicotine experience.
“It is the toxic by-products, not the nicotine, that are responsible for smoking-related deaths and diseases.
“Understanding alternatives and making clear distinctions between smoking and vaping are critical to our smoke free ambitions.
“The APPG on Vaping made several recommendations on vaping in the workplace and in public places, these are endorsed by the UKVIA and if implemented would support adult smokers in their transition to less harmful alternatives and give those who already made the switch the best chance of sticking with it.”
To achieve its ambitions the forthcoming control plan must champion less harmful alternatives to smoking combustible tobacco, in particular the growing body of evidence showing vaping to be the most effective alternative for adult smokers looking to quit smoking.
David Jones (Conservative), Honorary Life Governor at Cancer Research UK, said, “The key issue with smoking is, of course, the smoke. Any evidence-based policy to assist the U.K.’s 7 million smokers must put forward alternative products to combustible tobacco.
“Continuing to raise awareness of those products is also key. E-cigarettes and the use of other alternatives saves lives, and we should make sure that message reaches every smoker in Britain.
“E-cigarettes are hugely important in the fight against smoking, and I commend NHS England for promoting them to smokers. It’s based on evidence and has a proven positive effect on the health of the nation.”
Jones pointed out that, in 2017, more than 50,000 smokers who would have carried on stopped with the aid of a vaping product.
“The TCP should embrace new products and allow for more measures for companies to promote them,” he said. “And the plan should contemplate legislation for a robust regulatory framework for all the products we have on the market.”
Next to speak was Adam Afriyie (Conservative), also Chair of the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology who sits on the APPG on Vaping.
“We’re in an era where we must be driven by data and evidence,” he said. “And it can’t be any clearer that, when it comes to vaping devices, electronic nicotine delivery devices and other technologies and ways nicotine can be used to help smokers to cease, that the data is only one way.
“It is so much safer to vape or use an electronic device than it is to smoke. Smoke is the killer. Tobacco is the killer.”
Afriyie urged the government to “not do what the EU has done and not do what the WHO seems to be doing by mangling the two issues (smoking and vaping) together.”
“Smoking is one thing,” he continued. “Smoking cessation devices that contain nicotine is a complete different thing. A completely different scale of harm and completely different scale of risk.
“Nobody really wants to smoke. It’s a good idea to remind people on an annual basis that there are alternatives, and not just nicotine patches but certainly to be looking at vaping devices.
“There is still ambiguity about whether or not vaping is a smoking cessation device or just another way of inhaling nicotine. The truth is, and this is clear from the evidence, it’s a smoking cessation device that woks and is twice as effective—if not higher than that—at helping smokers to cease smoking relative to the other treatments available.”
He concluded: “We are the first in the world at genomics, first in the world for the vaccine rollout, first in the world for fintech and financial services—let’s make this another one: let’s be the first in the world to implement a TCP that clearly takes on board the wonderful innovations of vaping, e-cigarettes and all the other technologies and not mangle it together in a smoking directive.”
We are the first in the world at genomics, first in the world for the vaccine rollout, first in the world for fintech and financial services—let’s make this another one: let’s be the first in the world to implement a TCP that clearly takes on board the wonderful innovations of vaping, e-cigarettes and all the other technologies and not mangle it together in a smoking directive.”
Labour MP Virendra Sharma told the committee that he came from “a family of nonsmokers” and that he himself does not smoke.
“I cannot see the appeal,” he said. “But clearly, people are addicted, and addiction needs treatment not moralizing. There are 3 million people who vape in Britain and nearly all are former smokers. That’s 3 million who choose a less harmful option. This is good news, but BAME communities and those with manual jobs and without university degrees are 2.5 times more likely to smoke than white, office working university educated colleagues. This has to be addressed.
“In the Asian community we need to offer alternatives to tobacco. There are terrible statistics about rates of oral cancers and anything we can do to reduce these rates will save lives.”
Another Labour MP, Alex Norris, spoke next and emphasized the consensus nature of the debate.
“We are all here in the spirit of cross party cooperation,” he said.
“E-cigarettes and vaping must be a feature of the TCP. I hope the minister and government generally via its role in the WHO push harder for stronger messages and clearer messages around the data and evidence at WHO level.
“I looked at the WHO website myself and could not fathom what it was trying to tell me. That makes it really hard for people thinking about alternatives to know what they’re supposed to do or not.
“Personally, I always rely on the Public Health England position from 2018, that vaping represents a 95 percent reduction in harm.
“The APPG’s report says that in 2017 vaping helped 50,000 people to stop smoking, and that concerns around children starting have not materialized.”
Bringing the debate to an end Jo Churchill (Conservative), who is also Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Prevention, Public Health and Primary Care at the Department of Health and Social Care, said: “Within our plan we will re-commit to the role of e-cigarette products. They certainly have a place in supporting smokers to quit and we will ensure they remain accessible while protecting nonsmokers and young people.”
Speaking after the session John Dunne, director general of the UK Vaping Industry Association, said:
“It was a very proud moment for the UKVIA to be quoted so extensively during this important debate and at such a crucial moment in the U.K.’s journey towards harm reduction.
“It’s not often that you witness different political parties reaching a consensus in this way but, it appears, the urgent need to reduce smoking rates in Britain and the vital role vaping can play in achieving smoke free 2030 are the issues where tribalism is put aside, and common sense prevails.”
The concept of tobacco harm reduction is gaining momentum in Europe, according to a new report by The European Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (ETHRA). On July 8, ETHRA published the results of its 2020 EU Nicotine Users Survey.
Launched online by ETHRA in the last quarter of 2020, the questionnaire addressed consumer use of nicotine products. Topics included smoking and the desire to quit, use of safer nicotine products and barriers to switching caused by European and national regulations. More than 37,000 people, including more than 35,000 EU residents, participated in the ETHRA survey.
According to ETHRA, more than 27,000 of the survey participants had completely quit smoking. Vapes, snus and nicotine pouches are the main harm reduction products used to quit. Among the respondents who had ever smoked, 83.5 percent of vapers and 73.7 percent of snus users had successfully stopped smoking.
Over 93 percent of vapers and 75 percent of snus users cited harm reduction and improvements to health as their reasons for adopting these products. The report shows that the reduced cost compared to smoking, the availability of flavors, the availability of products and the ability to adjust vaping products are other major factors for consumers when switching to harm reduction products.
The lack of availability of low-risk nicotine products presents a major obstacle to consumers wishing to quit smoking.
However, smoking remains the predominant way of consuming nicotine in Europe. More than 67 percent of the current smokers who responded to our survey want to quit, but the ETHRA report shows they face barriers in their desire to be smoke-free.
The lack of availability of low-risk nicotine products presents a major obstacle to consumers wishing to quit smoking. The EU ban on the sale of snus (which exempts Sweden), illustrates this barrier, with 31 percent of current smokers indicating that they would be interested in trying snus if its sale were legalized in the EU.
A quarter (24.3 percent) of those who smoke but who want to quit cited the high price of safer alternatives as a barrier to quitting smoking. This number rises to 44.7 percent in countries with a high tax on vaping products, such as Estonia, Finland and Portugal.
The EU Tobacco Product Directive (TPD) restrictions of a maximum nicotine concentration of 20mg/ml and a maximum bottle volume of 10ml have driven vapers to very low nicotine e-liquids. More than 30 percent of people who vape and smoke (“dual users”) believed they could completely quit smoking if the EU nicotine limit were increased.
Meanwhile, harm reduction advocates are anxiously awaiting pending amendments to the TPD. If the EU bans flavors, 28 percent of vapers are likely to restart smoking, and 71 percent would consider using the black market or other alternative sources, according to the survey. In the 16 EU countries without a vape tax, only 1 percent of vapers are currently using alternative sources.
If the EU repealed the 10 ml bottle limit, 89 percent of vapers said they would buy larger bottles of e-liquid to reduce plastic waste. 83 percent of vapers are in favor of having access to an EU database on e-liquid ingredients.
Considering the results from the EU Nicotine Users Survey 2020, ETHRA recommends the lifting of the EU ban on the sale of snus, revising upwards the 10 ml refill bottle and 20 mg/ml nicotine concentration limits, and the publication of databases on vaping products.
The organization also urges a repeal of vaping taxes in 12 countries and the lifting of flavor bans in Estonia, Finland and Hungary to give European smokers the freedom to quit smoking using low-risk products.
It is time to the end of the internecine warfare over vaping, according to Clifford Douglas, former vice president of Tobacco Control at the American Cancer Society and founder of the Center for Tobacco Control.
In a recently published commentary, Douglas writes that the U.S. tobacco control community is “letting down tens of millions of adult smokers, their families and friends, healthcare providers and government decisionmakers.”
“I refer to my community’s approach to dealing with electronic cigarettes,” Douglas writes. “We are now neck-deep in intractable internecine warfare between the mainstream tobacco control community, whose primary focus is on protecting youth from the dangers of vaping, and the tobacco harm reduction (THR) community, some of whose scientists are also committed participants in mainstream tobacco control efforts. The THR community emphasizes the potential benefits of vaping for adult smokers who cannot or will not quit smoking otherwise. It seems that ne’er the twain shall meet.”
There are ways to prevent youth use that won’t inflict harm on adult smokers.
Vapor advocates welcomed Douglas’ comments.
“The Canadian Vaping Association commends Douglas for trying to bridge the gap between tobacco control and vape advocates,” the CVA wrote in a press note. “In the end, we all have the same goal of a tobacco free society. The past practices of tobacco companies have caused distrust of the vape industry with regulators and the public. It is important to remember that this industry was created by smokers, for smokers. We don’t want youth vaping and have proposed many reasonable solutions. There are ways to prevent youth use that won’t inflict harm on adult smokers,” said Darryl Tempest, executive director of the CVA.
Douglas has also formerly served as a special counsel on tobacco issues in the U.S. House of Representatives, as a tobacco control policy advisor for the U.S. Assistant Secretary for Health and the U.S. Surgeon General, and as a lawyer representing injured smokers and state attorneys general in litigation against the tobacco industry.
The Independent European Vape Alliance (IEVA) has expressed concern about “the content and the tone” of the European Commission’s recent report on the application of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), which suggests that further restrictions on vapers might be proposed.
Credit: Yuri4u80
According to the IEVA, the effect of the Commission’s proposals would be to ban most vaping products on the market today.
“While the Commission is careful not to say it out loud, its proposals would effectively ban most vaping products available today,” the organization wrote in a press release. “It suggests revising all the unjustifiable limits the last TPD set downwards, removing most flavors and banning many of the devices commonly used today. Vapers in the EU would lose most of the products they use to stay away from cigarettes today. A flavor ban alone would, according to the Commission’s own figures, remove two thirds of today’s vaping market.”
The IEVA says the report fails to acknowledge the concept of harm reduction. “The report fails to acknowledge any of the evidence on the relative risks of vaping and smoking,” the IEVA wrote. “This is despite member state governments running campaigns trying to encourage smokers to switch to Vaping. Santé Publique France, for example, has launched an anti-smoking campaign called ‘Je choisis la vapotage’ (‘I choose vaping’) which makes clear that “you can use vaping products without taking short-term health risks”. The Commission must take account of best practice in the EU, not ignore it.”
Some of the report’s proposals on vaping, says the IEVA, could also lead to more young people smoking.
“Shortly after this report was published, Yale University released the first real world study on the effect of flavor bans on youth smoking prevalence,” the IEVA stated. “In the City of San Francisco flavored vaping products were banned in 2018. Since then, smoking has doubled among high school students in the area relative to trends in districts without the ban, even when adjusting for individual demographics and other tobacco policies. This study was funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products. There was no industry involvement in the study.”
The IEVA says the report insufficiently focuses on the real enemy of public health—smoking. “While the Commission does question whether the nicotine threshold for vaping products should be lower, it has brushed aside calls from members of the European Parliament to adapt the method for measuring tar, nicotine and carbon monoxide levels in cigarette smoke,” the IEVA wrote. “This combination of policies would ensure that cigarettes deliver far more nicotine—an addictive substance—than vaping products. While there have been no reported deaths in Europe caused by vaping TPD regulated products, smoking kills half of its regular users.”
