Dear COP10 Delegate,
I am writing to strongly encourage you to take an evidence-based approach to your advocacy for tobacco harm reduction at the upcoming WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Conference of Parties (COP10).
I am concerned that a number of delegates and organisations are promoting ideological anti-smoking and anti-vaping measures rather than science-driven, reduced-harm alternatives to smoking such as vaping, heated tobacco, snus and the like.
In particular, we have seen the success in New Zealand of allowing smokers to use vaping as a safer and effective way of quitting.
Pushing further restrictions onto vaping and other reduced-harm products will only serve to make quitting smoking more difficult, leaving more New Zealanders stuck with the health and financial burdens of smoking.
I am also worried about the rising levels of organised crime and the risks of further empowering gangs if tobacco and vaping restrictions further drive a growth in black-market tobacco. Already in New Zealand, one in eight cigarettes smoked comes from the black market. In Australia, where there are even stricter restrictions, that figure is one in four.
The more restrictions we impose on legal tobacco – and effective reduced-harm alternatives – the more we will see harm to our communities caused by even more organised and wealthier criminals taking advantage of the growing demand for black market tobacco products. Increased criminal activity not only punishes law-abiding taxpayers with increased costs for the police and the courts, but also those victims of crime who are simply trying to make an honest living.
I urge you to stand up against those WHO delegates and supposed experts who continue to spread misinformation around the efficacy of vaping as a smoking cessation tool. This goes completely against the latest evidence from Cochrane (who the Ministry of Health considers the “gold standard for determining the relative effectiveness of different interventions”) which stated that “there was high certainty that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine Electronic Cigarettes than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy”.
New Zealand’s vaping history has up until now been a global success story showcasing the effectiveness of reduced-harm products as a tool to reduce smoking. We cannot risk undoing this progress by supporting, or remaining silent to, calls for further restrictions of the single most effective smoking cessation tool we have.
Kind regards,
