The EU’s health policies continue to ignore scientific evidence

By
BrusselsReport.eu
-

By Michael Landl, Director at the World Vapers’ Alliance. The article has been reviewed and edited by Pieter Cleppe 

Millions of smokers have managed to quit smoking thanks to vaping and similar less harmful alternatives to smoking. At the same time, traditional anti-smoking policies, like tobacco taxes, advertising and marketing bans, and high taxation, to name a few, have had only limited effectiveness thus far. Although commendable, these policy measures clearly haven’t brought about the desired outcomes, given how in the EU, there still are more than 80 million current smokers, and nearly 700,000 deaths due to smoking-induced illnesses every year.

As conventional policies have failed to drive down this staggering number, new innovations, such as vaping, have entered the market and have the potential to save millions of lives. With consumer-friendly vaping regulations, 19 million smokers could switch to vaping in Europe – a 95% less harmful alternative.

New scientific evidence is being ignored by the EU

Just last week, the new evidence review from England’s Office of Health Improvement and Disparities (the successor to Public Health England) concluded that “vaping poses only a small fraction of the risks of smoking” and that exposure to carcinogens, respiratory toxicants, and CVD-related toxicants is “significantly lower” compared to smoking.

Unfortunately, the EU and the EU Commission in particular are still not encouraging vaping as a harm reduction method, unlike the UK. Several policy suggestions floating around Brussels would have detrimental effects for public health and are ignoring scientific evidence and the experience of consumers.

Vaping flavours matter to reduce smoking rates

Studies have proven that two-thirds of vapers use non-tobacco flavours to quit smoking and are 230% more likely to quit this way. Therefore, the important role of flavours for smoking cessation cannot be neglected.

Only in the EU, we saw multiple attempts to ban or regulate vaping flavours. Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Hungary, and some others have already forbidden flavoured liquids. And even though there was a glimpse of hope with the Swedish government finally rejecting the flavour ban, last year’s “Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan”, which will serve as the guideline for the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) update, left the door open for flavour bans.

Restricting flavoured liquids makes it more challenging for smokers to quit and risks hard-fought progress made by consumers that have moved away from more dangerous cigarettes. According to the University of Waterloo, flavour bans push 5 out of 10 vapers back to smoking or the black market.

Nicotine is not our enemy

People consume nicotine, but they die from smoking. Yorkshire Cancer Research has stated that “nicotine is not the cause of death from smoking” and that the “harm from smoking comes from the thousands of other chemicals in tobacco smoke.”

Reducing the number of smokers and allowing them to rapidly and efficiently switch to less harmful alternatives should be a major priority for public health agencies worldwide. Unfortunately, too many politicians confuse nicotine consumption with the diseases caused by smoking and, therefore, target the wrong enemy — nicotine. This is especially odd, given how nicotine is not considered a problem in conventional nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Why should nicotine be a bigger problem when consumed in e-cigarettes?  These misconceptions lead to counterproductive regulation.

Currently, the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive only allows a maximum nicotine strength of 20mg/ml, and nicotine-liquid containers can be no larger than 10 ml. The EU should abolish the general nicotine limit, or at least not further lower the current level, because overly restrictive nicotine levels will cause fewer people to switch from smoking to less harmful alternatives such as vaping. That’s especially the case for heavy smokers.

Higher taxation leads to more smoking

Tobacco and vaping taxation are regulated by the “Tobacco Tax Directive,” which is, like the TBD, also in the process of being updated. Many politicians have called for higher taxes on vaping products, but they thereby ignore the fact that making vaping less appealing to smokers through increased prices will discourage current smokers from switching to less harmful alternatives.

Multiple studies have demonstrated that higher prices of vaping products lead to higher smoking rates. Consequently, a higher tax on vaping products will have a detrimental effect on public health in the European Union. Moreover, increased taxes on vaping products are particularly harmful to lower-income groups, which make up the most significant proportion of current smokers. In times of rising costs of living, making it more expensive to quit smoking would be a catastrophic signal from the EU.

Conclusion

It is time for politicians and bureaucrats to listen to citizens. The European Commission’s call for evidence about vaping has seen a record number of 24,000 responses this summer, showing that consumers want to embrace tobacco harm reduction, and to that end, vaping has been proven the most successful so far.

With the update of its Tobacco Products Directive update, the EU must finally embrace harm reduction and support vaping to save the lives of millions of smokers. Rather than considering flavour bans or higher taxation for vaping, smokers must be informed about the benefits of vaping and actively encouraged to switch.

With a similarly ambitious regulatory framework to the UK, 19 million people in the EU could switch from smoking to vaping. 700,000 deaths per year as a result of smoking should be reason enough to question the current approach.

To raise awareness about this, the World Vapers’ Alliance will host community events and protests in France, Poland, Czech Republic, Italy, Portugal, and Belgium, in order to draw attention to what’s one of the most crucial pieces of legislation for the future of vaping. It is time for politicians to listen to consumers. Let’s not give up on them. Every individual deserves the right to choose, and that’s what we’re fighting for.

 

Disclaimer: www.BrusselsReport.eu will under no circumstance be held legally responsible or liable for the content of any article appearing on the website, as only the author of an article is legally responsible for that, also in accordance with the terms of use.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR