Tobacco and fossil fuel industries: a similar logic and methods

A survey published in July 2026 by the Transparency and Truth initiative of the anti-smoking association OxySuisse draws a parallel between the tobacco industry and the fossil fuel industry.[1]. She argues that these two sectors, aware for decades of the harmful effects of their products, have deployed similar strategies to preserve their profits, delay regulations and influence the public debate on health and climate.

Two industries, one common challenge

The investigation begins with a central observation: the tobacco and fossil fuel industries alone are responsible for more than 16 million deaths worldwide each year, while also causing major environmental damage. It notes that the tobacco industry has been aware of the dangers of its products since the 1950s, while the fossil fuel industry has been informed since the 1970s about the role of fossil fuels in climate change. According to OxySuisse, this knowledge has not led to a swift reassessment of industrial practices. On the contrary, both sectors have allegedly sought to minimize risks, delay regulations, and protect a business model based on the mass sale of harmful products.

Scientific disinformation: a strategy common to both industries

The two industries share disinformation and influence techniques, with the same mechanism: denying risks for as long as possible, sowing doubt when they can no longer be contested, then diverting the debate to other subjects to weaken public action.

One of the most frequently used levers involves influencing science. The University of Bath's "Science for Profit" model describes several methods used by corporations to steer scientific work, its interpretation, dissemination, and political use. University researchers explain that the goal is to create the illusion of scientific debate in order to prevent the adoption of binding measures. In the case of tobacco, For example, Swiss industry has funded research and used the prestige of universities to steer and disrupt scientific debate.

While industry research projects are influenced and used by the industry in its lobbying efforts, the requirements manufacturers seek to impose before any public health measure is adopted are particularly stringent. Under the guise of "rigorous science," demonstrating harmful effects is sometimes made extremely complex. For example, Philip Morris used this type of argument against studies addressing the risks associated with exposure to secondhand smoke. Similar strategies are being employed in the climate debate.

A speech that was also political and economic

According to researchers, the two industries not only challenge independent science, but also develop a narrative drawing on libertarian political and economic ideology, emphasizing individual freedom and shifting responsibility for problems onto individuals.

This narrative allows them to shift responsibility onto consumers, while portraying any regulation as an infringement on freedoms or a threat to employment and growth. OxySuisse provides several examples of arguments used by representatives of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries, particularly regarding freedom of choice, freedom of trade, and the alleged catastrophic effects of stricter regulations on certain sectors (in the case of tobacco: restaurants, food distribution, retail, advertising, communications, etc.).

Following this logic, industries readily present themselves as responsible actors, even attempting to position themselves as part of the solution, when in fact they are the source of the problem. Thus, in order to secure a seat at the decision-making table and in the public debate, they present themselves as responsible partners.

The Swiss example: very powerful cross-lobbying between industries

A large part of the investigation focuses on Switzerland, presented as a particularly fertile ground for the influence of interest groups, notably due to the opacity of lobbying and the presence of several parliamentarians linked to organizations representing the interests of the oil, automotive, or tobacco industries. For example, Albert Rösti, former president of Swissoil and auto-suisse, became a Federal Councillor heading the Department of Energy. Gregor Rutz, meanwhile, is both a National Councillor for the Swiss People's Party (SVP/UDC) and president of both Swiss Tobacco and IG Freiheit.

Furthermore, each federal parliamentarian can accredit two lobbyists, granting them privileged access to the Federal Palace. Access cards are specifically issued to representatives of industries directly affected by political decisions.

On the financial front, the authors of the investigation indicate that Philip Morris paid 35,000 Swiss francs (€37,600) to the Swiss People's Party (UDC) and the same amount to the Liberal Party (PLR) for the 2023 federal elections. Avenergy also reportedly supported political candidates. These financial flows are presented in the study as an additional means of influencing public policy.

The weight of this interference has tangible consequences for the country. Under the influence of the tobacco and nicotine lobby, the Swiss Confederation has never ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.. Article 5.3 of this treaty provides, in particular, for a general obligation to protect public policies from the financial and other interests of industries.

Faced with false solutions based on "innovation," only the fight against industrial lobbying matters.

In its study, OxySuisse also dedicates a section to "false solutions." It highlights "techno-solutionism," the notion that industrial innovations alone are sufficient to solve problems caused by industry itself. In the case of fossil fuels, the association cites biofuels and carbon capture as examples of solutions presented as central but deemed insufficient or diverting attention from genuine emission reductions. Regarding tobacco, the "transformation" strategy of multinational corporations, with its emphasis on so-called reduced-risk products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches, directly reflects this approach. According to the study's authors, this communication obscures public health priorities and, above all, allows for the maintenance of a mass market for nicotine.

OxySuisse is therefore calling for a coordinated public response. Such an approach requires regulating marketing, making the activities of lobbyists and parliamentarians transparent, ending certain public-private partnerships, particularly within universities, and informing and raising public awareness on these issues. This also includes taking legal action against disinformation and manipulation practices. Finally, the authors emphasize the importance of continuing scientific research on influence strategies and the commercial determinants of health.

©Generation Without Tobacco

AD

[1]The fossil fuel industry and the tobacco industry: a disturbing resemblance, Transparency and Truth, published July 30, 2026, accessed July 31, 2026

National Committee Against Smoking |