Friday 25 April 2014
Advertise  |  Subscribe  |  Register  | 


About cookies: we use cookies to support features like login and sharing articles. Keep cookies enabled to enjoy the full site experience. By browsing our site with cookies enabled, you are agreeing to their use. Review our cookies information for more details.

Smoking kills, so why ban smokeless tobacco?

By Medical and executive director The American Council on Science and Health New York  -  10.01.2013 / 03:40 CET
Why the tobacco proposal will have the opposite effect on health.

Your report on the recent draft tobacco-products directive was unfortunately superficial (“Commission proposes to ban menthol cigarettes,” 20 December-9 January).

I should note first that I write on behalf of the American Council on Science and Health, a consumer organisation concerned about the dangers of tobacco and with no disclosures relevant to this letter.

The draft proposes measures that, while ostensibly aimed at promoting the EU's public health by reducing the toll of “tobacco”, will instead have the opposite effect.

The approximately 700,000 EU residents who die prematurely each year from tobacco die from repetitively inhaling cigarette smoke.

So it is mindless and antithetical to public health that the proposal continues the ban on one of the safest forms of nicotine delivery – smokeless tobacco, in the form of snus – while allowing sales of more toxic products (such as hookah tobacco) and lethal, addictive cigarettes.

This approach ignores – wilfully, it appears – data from Sweden, the one country in which snus is legal. That suggests that snus use significantly reduces smoking. The obvious explanation is that snus, which in its modern form kills almost no one, supplies the nicotine that ex-smokers crave in a form potent enough to permit them to quit smoking successfully. Meanwhile, accepted pharmaceutical methods of weaning smokers off cigarettes fail nine times out of ten.

The proposal also gratuitously adds an insurmountable hurdle to the sale of a new form of

smokeless tobacco – electronic cigarettes – by setting ridiculously low standards for nicotine delivery.

Instead, the proposal gambles on banning “slims” and flavoured cigarettes and on requiring large graphic warnings. There is little or no evidence that these serve as disincentives to smoking, either among adults or teens.

The net effect of this proposal will be to protect cigarette markets and ineffective pharmaceuticals, while increasing the tragic, largely preventable toll taken by smoking. The current proposal throws smokers under the Big Tobacco bus.

© 2014 European Voice. All rights reserved.
Clinical trials

Most viewed in Health & society

Commission launches mHealth consultation

Commission requests information on how to deal with data protection and safety concerns.


MEPs back new clinical trial rules You need an active subscription to read this article

New rules will require greater transparency.


Related articles

Rush of deals that will require EU approval, but patient groups warn of threat from drug market realignments.

Commission requests information on how to deal with data protection and safety concerns.

The financial crisis has put great strains on healthcare systems across the EU.

There are huge gaps between member states when it comes to healthcare provision.




Your comment
Please note: The fields followed by an asterisk (*) are obligatory fields



Please, copy the code on the left into the box on the right

 I accept the Terms & conditions
 I would like to share my e-mail & website


Cookies info | Privacy policy | Terms & conditions