Live
- Study decodes how long-term pesticide exposure raises Parkinson’s risk
- Tirupati: Governor Abdul Nazeer visits BIRRD hospital
- World Design Day: Celebrating creativity, innovation & human flourishing
- Nellore: Jagan has no moral right to seek public mandaten says Balakrishna
- Google Introduces AI Conversation Practice for English Learners
- NIPFP forecasts India’s 7.1% GDP growth this fiscal
- Rajamahendravaram: General observer inspects election preparedness
- Deloitte pegs GDP growth at 6.6%
- Forex reserves ease for 2nd consecutive week
- Ongole: ‘NDA committed to welfare of minorities’
What can India learn from Sweden’s pragmatic tobacco control policy?
Sweden is a proof that a pragmatic tobacco control policy allowing consumers to transition to far less dangerous tobacco alternatives could save many lives in India.
Sweden is a proof that a pragmatic tobacco control policy allowing consumers to transition to far less dangerous tobacco alternatives could save many lives in India.
Two decades ago, the WHO’s scientific advisers recommended against the use of smokefree tobacco as a strategy to reduce harm for smokers who won’t stop. They argued that the benefits have not been demonstrated, while the potential for harm remains, stating that a “lower risk of adverse health outcomes is achieved by reducing smoking and not by substituting with an alternative .
As we know today – and many knew then – when it comes to snus, a low-toxicant smokeless tobacco product, this advice was wrong. As a result, Swedish men, who were the first to embrace snus as an alternative to smoking, have the lowest smoking prevalence in the European Union and the lowest rates of tobacco-attributable deaths.
India has 267 million tobacco users, with roughly a third of these tobacco users being smokers. The remaining two thirds consume smokeless tobacco products that are far more dangerous than snus.
When it comes to new, far less toxic tobacco and nicotine alterntives that don’t burn tobacco, the WHO has been providing the same advice as they’ve given on snus 20 years ago. In the documents released by the WHO for the 10th Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) recently, it recommends that countries ban or restrict and tax all tobacco products the same as if they were the same from the perspective of health risks. This is despite scientific consensus that burning of tobacco, not tobacco or nicotine itself, is responsible for most of the harm from smoking. Effectively, the message they’re giving to smokers who won’t quit is that they may as well carry on smoking.
It is no longer just Sweden that has seen record-breaking declines in smoking thanks to smokers being able to choose an alternative that can replace cigarettes. Norway, UK, New Zealand or Japan have seen unparalleled declines in smoking rates as safer alternatives displaced deadly cigarettes.
When it comes to smoking, the WHO doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel: just follow science. Tobacco users have the right to improve their health by having access to options that can give them nicotine with far lower health risks associated.
