Tobacco industry relies on Czech EU presidency to push harm reduction vision

Ahead of the revision of the European Tobacco Products Directive, a Czech think tank proposes to deconstruct the current anti-smoking policy in Europe in order to better promote new tobacco industry products.

A review of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD2) is due to be launched soon. This is an opportune moment for a Czech think tank to publish a report on the “new approach to tobacco legislation”, which aims to place harm reduction policy at the heart of European public policies.[1]. A discourse and methods that are strongly reminiscent of those of the tobacco industry.

Critical opposition to public health policies

The report by the think tank in question, the Center for Economic and Market Analyses (CETA), first denounces the anti-smoking policy deployed in the European Union (EU) as "ineffective and dangerous". It also opposes the guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) and its Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC).

The principle of high taxation of tobacco and nicotine products, widely recognized as one of the most effective and cost-effective measures to reduce smoking prevalence[2], is thus vigorously opposed. Measures to protect minors and non-smokers are considered a form of prohibition, a rhetoric generally used by actors close to the tobacco industry. Well established in Europe, the policy that should lead to a Tobacco-Free Generation by 2040, i.e. fewer than 5,% smokers, is considered "unrealistic". The proposals of the European Plan to Beat Cancer are also criticized as inappropriate, since they call for a Tobacco-Free Generation by 2040, and they recommend the generalization of plain packaging, the banning of all flavors, the extension of tobacco taxation to new products and the fight against advertising and promotion of all tobacco and nicotine products.[3].

The arguments and scientific evidence usually accepted are set aside, in favor of another science, presented as more rigorous and which is especially more lenient with new tobacco and nicotine products. Similarly, the studies considered "reliable" are above all those which support the notion of risk reduction and the use of new tobacco and nicotine products. In the studies considered, the words of "experts" frequently replace scientific evidence, but opinions unfavorable to electronic cigarettes are discredited. A widely recognized opinion, such as that of the SCHEER Committee on electronic cigarettes[4], is thus particularly criticized by the CETA report.

Production of a questionable index

The reference for this report is the Harm Reduction Index, developed by CETA on qualitative and quantitative criteria, which ranks seven Central European countries according to the anti-smoking measures they have taken, particularly in terms of taxes, and the penetration of new tobacco and nicotine products in each of them. Since the choice of indicators is rarely neutral, CETA prefers, for example, to base itself on the number of cigarettes sold, which limits the possibilities of comparison, rather than on the smoking prevalence rate, the most widely used reference. In this ranking, Austria is placed first, due to a strong development of vaping products, the affordable price of tobacco products, the maintenance of flavours for all non-smoked products and a late ban on smoking areas in bars and restaurants. The Czech Republic, for its part, appears second in this ranking and is presented as a "model". Sweden comes in third place, particularly because of the large proportion of its population that uses snus, the oral tobacco pouches that are placed between the lip and gum.

The “Czech model” in question

With a smoking prevalence of 28.5 % in 2018, including 21.1 % daily smokers, the Czech Republic may be of interest to the tobacco industry in more than one way. This country has been in favour of harm reduction since 2018, by promoting heated tobacco products from the outset and granting them low taxation. The ban on smoking in public places was only introduced in 2017.[5]. The use of electronic cigarettes is still permitted in all public places. It is also one of the countries in Europe with the lowest tobacco taxation, despite recent increases. The tax rate on heated tobacco is the lowest in Europe (23 %), and there is no excise duty on electronic cigarettes. A legal loophole on tobacco-free nicotine products makes it possible to sell them to minors. The promotion of these nicotine products is in principle prohibited, which apparently does not prevent manufacturers from organizing free distribution operations of pouches.[6] in public spaces, at the risk of offering them to minors[7].

It can be assumed that among the reasons that attract the attention of industrialists, the fact that the Czech Republic will take over the EU presidency from 1^er next July and for a period of six months. As the CETA report strongly encourages, this presidency will allow the Czech Republic to provide guidance to European policy, which seems to be of particular interest to tobacco manufacturers in view of the upcoming negotiation of the TPD3 directive on tobacco and nicotine products.

Although it is not included in its Index, the case of the United Kingdom is widely highlighted by CETA for the integration of electronic cigarettes in its anti-smoking policy, but passes over in silence the other provisions put in place by this country over the last two decades: drastic increase in the price of tobacco products via a strong tax policy, severe restrictions governing the trade in these products – including the introduction of plain packaging –, complete bans on smoking in all places of collective use, implementation of measures to protect public policies against the tobacco lobby, reinforced support for populations in quitting smoking, etc.

Proposals similar to those of the tobacco industry

Among the proposals put forward, one of the most troubling is to oppose smoking cessation to risk reduction. However, several studies have highlighted that risk reduction in tobaccology begins with stopping tobacco consumption, whether or not it is supported by various nicotine supports. The dual consumption of smoked tobacco and electronic cigarettes has notably been pointed out as at least as toxic as that of tobacco consumed alone, with health benefits only being observed when smoking is completely stopped.[8]. For CETA, quitting smoking is never a viable option and is disqualified as a "chimerical project", while hundreds of thousands of smokers still manage to quit smoking every year. For CETA, as in the speeches of the tobacco industry, the only imaginable "alternative" for smokers would be to switch from smoking cigarettes to other supposedly less harmful products, without harming the manufacturers' profit margins.

Furthermore, the CETA report particularly emphasizes its desire to liberalize advertising for tobacco and nicotine products. Like the tobacco industry, the CETA report confuses information and advertising, with the aim of opening the advertising floodgates in order to fully promote the products placed on the market by manufacturers. CETA also calls for an information campaign for the general public on new tobacco and nicotine products, which would supplement, with the help of public funds, the private advertising effort. Conversely, aligning the legislation on nicotine products with that on tobacco products makes it possible, in part, to limit access to these addictive products.

One of the other major recommendations of the CETA report is the deindexation of taxes on new tobacco and nicotine products from taxes on other tobacco products. This demarcation between tobacco products and new tobacco and nicotine products is also based on a distinction in terms of advertising rights, but also in terms of packaging, health warnings and flavourings. The issue of flavourings is fundamental here, in that it constitutes a clear commercial vector for all new tobacco and nicotine products, which use fruity and sweet flavours in particular to attract young people and non-smoking minors.[9]The ban on menthol flavours for tobacco products, imposed in the EU in May 2020, is a deterrent to CETA, especially if it were to be extended to all new tobacco and nicotine products.

A think tank apparently linked to the tobacco industry

The CETA report makes no mention of its sponsors. CETA's director, Jiri Schwarz, is, however, a member of the scientific council of the Institute for Economic and Fiscal Research (IREF).[10], a Parisian think tank linked to Philip Morris France (PMF). In March 2021, IREF published a document funded by PMF calling for " Rethinking the taxation of new tobacco and nicotine products ", in a very similar approach of questioning the principles of the fight against smoking, in particular the increase in taxes on tobacco and nicotine products. This proximity between the two think tanks seems to indicate that it is indeed the tobacco industry that is at the helm of the CETA approach, which is confirmed by the strong convergence between the arguments used.

Aleš Rod, one of the authors of the report, is also a member of the advisory committee for the Czech government. His presence on this advisory committee is probably not unrelated to the Czech government's bias in favour of harm reduction, and more specifically of heated tobacco. Heated tobacco products remain the tobacco industry's main area of action, in terms of taxes, flavours and packaging. The amalgamation of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco is systematically maintained by this industry, which derives its best profit margins from heated tobacco products and therefore strives to maintain the lowest possible tax rates on these products. This is why it demands a clear separation between taxes applicable to tobacco products and those relating to heated tobacco products.

The CETA report ultimately appears to be an attempt to lobby in favour of the new products that the tobacco industry is seeking to impose. It shows once again the need for research independent of the industry to properly assess the toxicity of the different products placed on the market, as well as the need to protect public policies from the influence of the tobacco industry and its front groups (art. 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control). The strong reactions orchestrated by the tobacco industry to the WHO guidelines on tobacco and vaping are generally a good indicator of their relevance.

Keywords: Czech Republic, CETA, European Union, electronic cigarette, heated tobacco, harm reduction, lobby

©Tobacco Free Generation

M.F.

---

[1] A new approach towards tobacco legislation: the case for harm reduction in CEE and the EU, CETA, June 2022.[2] Tobacco Control in Practice, Case studies of implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in the WHO European Region, Article 6: Price and tax measures to reduce the demand for tobacco[3] European Parliament commits to a tobacco-free generation in Europe by 2040, Generation Without Tobacco, published on February 18, 2022, consulted on June 21, 2022.[4] Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER), Opinion on electronic cigarettes. Published on April 16, 2021, accessed on June 21, 2022.[5] Czech Republic Enforces Smoking Ban After Years of Debate, VOA, published May 31, 2017, accessed June 21, 2022.[6] Pouches containing nicotine powder and placed between the gum and the lip, based on the model of Swedish “snus” (tobacco pouches).[7] Raimbault A, Nicotine Pouches: An Addictive But Legal Trend Among Czech Teens, Radio Prague International, published June 20, 2022, accessed June 21, 2022.[8] Berlowitz, JB, et al. (2022) E-cigarette Use and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: A Longitudinal Analysis of the PATH Study, 2013-2019. Circulation (2022);145:1557–1559.. doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.057369.[9] The Federal Trade Commission warns about the flavors and nicotine concentration of vaping products, Generation Without Tobacco, published March 23, 2022, consulted June 22, 2022.[10] Our people, CETA website.National Committee Against Smoking |