Vapers Digest 10th June
Wednesday’s News at a glance:
Ban May Have Increased Smoking ~ Prohibition Incompatible with Public Health ~ Yach Report: THR Could Save 100 Million Lives ~ Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Nicotine vaping—public health miracle, or risk to children? Professor Cliff Douglas ~ CAPHRA says its time to stop targeting those who help people who smoke ~ Impossible by design: the EU survey on future tobacco and nicotine policy ~ Is it ethical to prohibit nicotine products ? ~ What Estonia Got Wrong About Vaping — and the Lesson the EU Is About to Ignore ~ Harm reduction society urges Parliament to rethink tobacco reforms ~ How vaping scare stories are made ~ Why Is It Harder for People in Rural Communities to Quit Smoking? ~ Sweden blocks EU pouch tax hike to protect its smoke-free status ~ Second Patel vape study retracted as lung disease paper is pulled over data concerns ~ FDA defends heightened review requirement for flavored vapes at Fifth Circuit ~ Trump FDA’s chance to crack down on Chinese black market harming our children ~ Beyond smoke: Why ‘one switch, everyone wins’ is reframing the global tobacco debate
Two From Dave Cross, Planet Of The Vapes
Ban May Have Increased Smoking
Elfbar has released the results of its vaping survey, one year on from the disposables ban, and finds that most adults have transitioned to from single-use to reusable devices. Unfortunately, the leading smoking cessation brand says its findings also suggest that the disposables ban may have resulted in increased smoking rates.
Prohibition Incompatible with Public Health
The prohibition of safer nicotine products is incompatible with public health, according to the global experts speaking out at the 13th annual Global Forum on Nicotine, which took place last week in Warsaw, Poland. “Banning or heavily restricting smoking-cessation tools directly impedes efforts to reduce the world’s annual toll of over 7 million smoking-related deaths,” they say.
Is it ethical to prohibit nicotine products ?
Jean-François Etter, Nicotine, tobacco and smoking cessation
Ingmar Kurg, NNA Smokefree Estonia
There is a comparison buried in the spreadsheets of the Estonian Tax and Customs Board that ought to be read into the record at every TPD3 working-group meeting in Brussels. In 2020 — after two years of a national e-liquid tax and a ban on every flavour but tobacco — the most excise Estonia managed to collect on nicotine e-liquid in a whole year was €1,055,711. In 2023, with that same tax back in force but menthol legal again and the trade coaxed back above ground, the figure was €5,774,902[6] — more than five times higher. The tax was the same. The product was the same. What changed was how much of the market the inspector could actually see.
Harm reduction society urges Parliament to rethink tobacco reforms
Victor Amadala, The Star
The Harm Reduction Society of Kenya has raised concerns over several provisions contained in the Tobacco Control (Amendment) Bill, 2024, warning lawmakers that some of the proposed measures could undermine public health goals, increase illicit trade and create unnecessary regulatory burdens.
In a memorandum submitted to the National Assembly and signed by Secretary General Michael Kariuki, the society urged MPs to adopt a more balanced and evidence-based approach to tobacco regulation, arguing that the legislation should focus on harm reduction rather than prohibition.
The society welcomed the ongoing review of Kenya’s tobacco control laws, noting that the tobacco industry has evolved significantly since the enactment of the Tobacco Control Act in 2007.
Yusef Adebayo, The Cable
Traditional tobacco control has often been built around a binary goal: quit or continue. But real-world behavior rarely fits neatly into absolutes. Many smokers struggle to quit despite awareness of the risks, access to cessation tools, and repeated attempts. Harm reduction introduces a more flexible framework, one that prioritizes risk reduction over risk elimination.
It accepts that while quitting nicotine entirely is ideal, for some people, quitting is difficult and reducing exposure to the most harmful delivery method, i.e. combustion, can still yield significant and meaningful public health gains.
This is the logic behind the “switch.” For instance, combustible cigarettes involve the burning of tobacco, a process that produces a range of chemicals with associated health risks. By contrast, non-combustible delivery systems, such as vaping and oral nicotine pouch products, operate without burning tobacco.
Visit Nicotine Science & Policy for more News from around the World
