Don’t Ignore the People: The WHO and EU Must Listen to Consumers on Tobacco Harm Reduction

New Delhi [India], September 8: As policymakers and international health officials convene in Dublin to determine the course of tobacco and nicotine regulation, one critical perspective is conspicuously absent: the voice of consumers.

At the heart of the World Conference on Tobacco Control lies a fundamental oversight. Adult smokers and users of safer alternatives, those most directly impacted by such policies, are consistently left out of the conversation. Their exclusion is not merely a procedural flaw; it underscores a deeper injustice in the global approach to tobacco control. Despite awareness efforts like light shows and silent protests, the core issue remains unresolved.

This shift away from consumer voices coincides with the rise of prohibition-focused policies, often shaped by influential stakeholders such as Michael Bloomberg and the World Health Organization. As these perspectives gain prominence, there is a risk that harm reduction strategies may be overlooked—despite their growing relevance and urgency.

With COP11 on the horizon this November in Geneva, where the future of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control will be negotiated, the stakes have never been higher. For years, this process has ignored harm reduction and excluded those who rely on it. Simultaneously, the European Union is preparing to revise its Tobacco Products Directive, a legislative move that will unfold under the Irish Presidency of the Council beginning July 2026. Additionally, the long-delayed update to the Tobacco Excise Tax Directive has reemerged on the agenda. These simultaneous developments will significantly shape global nicotine policy, placing the EU and global leaders at a crossroads—whether to embrace innovation or continue down a path that may compromise public health achievements.

Evidence over the past decades from countries such as Sweden, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand has consistently shown that safer nicotine alternatives are instrumental in reducing smoking rates. More recently, forward-thinking harm reduction policies in Greece and the Czech Republic have delivered substantial public health benefits, reinforcing the case for evidence-based approaches.

Yet the European Union seems to be aligning more closely with the World Health Organization’s outdated, ideologically driven stance. 

A leaked document reveals that the European Commission is contemplating a substantial tax hike on all alternative nicotine products. Other draft proposals hint at sweeping bans on vaping flavours and restrictions on nicotine pouches. These types of interventions have been tried and failed elsewhere. Rather than improving public health, they risk protecting the cigarette markets by eliminating access to less harmful alternatives.

Beyond being misguided, such approaches raise concerns about democratic accountability. When the World Vapers’ Alliance submitted over 100,000 signatures to the European Parliament in support of harm reduction, it brought to light a significant disconnect between EU policymakers and the public. These were not corporate lobbyists, but ordinary Europeans who had successfully quit smoking through alternatives. Now, they face the risk of losing those tools while being ignored by their representatives.

Meanwhile, the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, heavily financed by Michael Bloomberg, continues to promote a rigid, abstinence-only model. This has led to bans on safer nicotine products, while traditional cigarettes remain readily available. In countries like Mexico and India, Bloomberg-backed vaping bans have stripped smokers of effective alternatives. 

It is imperative that policymakers reject the influence of prohibitionist campaigns and instead support regulatory frameworks rooted in science and real-world results. COP11 must not become another closed-door meeting where consumer perspectives are ignored and outdated dogmas persist. Silencing these voices will not erase them. It will only foster mistrust and hinder meaningful progress.

At this critical juncture, the Nation must choose whether to disregard the people it represents or to pioneer a new era in tobacco control—one that saves lives by empowering individuals rather than excluding them.

By Alberto Gomez Hernandez, Policy Manager at the World Vapers' Alliance