Four fake narratives the tobacco lobby is floating to undermine India’s e-cigarette ban
The relative safety of nicotine over tobacco is a myth. Less harm does not mean harmless.
The Government of India's decision to ban electronic nicotine delivery systems last fortnight - also known as ENDS or e-cigarettes - has sent a shock wave through the tobacco lobby.
With its profits declining globally, the cigarette industry is investing heavily in other strategies to stay profitable. As awareness of the dangers of tobacco use has increased and stricter regulations are being introduced, the industry is in dire need to invent a product that continues the addiction to nicotine. ENDS is one such tool. It is claimed to give pure nicotine, without the other harmful elements present in traditional cigarettes.
A false narrative was created by the tobacco lobby to portray ENDS as 95% less harmful than cigarettes. It was offered as a powerful aid to help smokers quit. With the Indian government ban, the tobacco lobby has returned with a high-decibel campaign of misinformation and distorted evidence.
The purpose of this article is to clear the smoke screen created by ENDS supporters. Here are some bits of misinformation they are using.
1 A British report says that e-cigarette is 95% safe
On 19 August 2015, the British government made public a new report commissioned by Public Health England, in a press release titled "E-cigarette is 95% less harmful than tobacco", the Landmark Review is estimated. -Credition strategy that minimizes the risks associated with traditional cigarettes. This was a claim for safety, suggesting that smokers and potential smokers may use this device with virtually no risk of health impairment.
The Public Health England report was adopted by the EDDS industry and groups that support vaping while supporting the e-cigarette vapor. These lobbyists used the report to derail any proposed legislation on ENDS. But the report written by two academics is seriously flawed.
The report's central thesis that e-cigarettes are 95% safer than traditional cigarettes relies on only one study. This paper ("Estimating the Harms of Nicotine-Containing Products Using the MCDA Approach, published in European Addiction Research") does not rely on clinical and epidemiological evidence, but is a quasi-model of beliefs and hypotheses . This is the opinion of 12 authors. Only three authors announced that they had received funding from the tobacco industry or with an interest in stopping the use of tobacco. Together with the pharmaceutical industry was working.
Since the study, other authors have been brought in by industry to participate in scientific discussions to obtain grants, advocate on their behalf, or promote ENDS through medical associations in key populations and markets.
The more important view of the British report was taken by medical journals. Lancet, in an editorial on 29 August 2015 and in the British Medical Journal on 15 September that year, highlighted the serious flaws and conflicts of interest of the paper on which the report relies.
A careful examination of the European addiction research paper based its analysis on an independent scientific committee on drugs set up by its lead author David J. Nutt in 2010 to understand drugs and substance abuse in the United Kingdom. The committee left for a two-day workshop in London in July 2013, listing the "relative importance of various types of harm related to the use of nicotine-containing products".
Criteria for loss and associated risk (established through arbitrary weight) are created by these experts for a range of products for loss. The workshop report and subsequent paper to label the ENDS relatively securely is based solely on the opinion of a set of carefully selected groups of experts, many of whom have little control over tobacco control or other parts of tobacco products Or the world has no experience or understanding.
Sadly, the authors of the report do not see serious flaws in the paper. The tobacco and vaping industry report says that it is based on ridiculously thin plains. The tragedy is that it has stoked a passionate fire among rape promoters, and the smoke screen needs to be cleaned. The relative safety of nicotine over tobacco is a myth. Being less harmful does not mean that e-cigarettes are harmless.
2 India has not banned cigarettes or bidis, so why the ENDS ban?
The success of the ban depends on the size of the consumer base: the larger the number of consumers, the lower the success rate. There are 270 million adult tobacco users in India who need their nicotine fix several times a day. E-cigarettes have a small consumer base and therefore a ban will prove to be the most effective. Furthermore, since e-cigarette firms are actually cigarette companies, they may voluntarily stop the cigarette business.
Beginning in 2012, Indian states began banning gutkha or tasteless tobacco. India also became the first country to sell tobacco to non-bailable offenders with seven years of rigorous imprisonment as punishment. As a result, India enjoyed a 17% decrease in tobacco consumption between 2010 and 2016, the most reported in any part of the world.
The tobacco farming industry is complex. The organized tobacco industry began in 1910 with the founding of the Imperial Tobacco Company, a previous incarnation of ITC. Cultivation was formalized in 1976 with the founding of the Tobacco Board, which only included tobacco required by cigarette manufacturers. Bidi and smokeless tobacco were excluded for political reasons. As a result, their activities are less regulated. The inputs that go into making these products (such as tendu leaves, arca nuts, catechu and tobacco) are also less regulated.
The government aims to govern the tobacco sector through structural changes. Through the launch of the National Tobacco Control Program in 2007-'08, the government hopes to reduce the demand for tobacco products and persuade farmers to gradually shift to other crops. The sudden ban will cause damage to the entire region. Comprehensive sanctions require a multi-sectoral approach and tremendous political will. That is why no country in the world (except Bhutan) has banned tobacco.
3 Why not regulate ENDS just like cigarettes?
The cigarette and e-cigarette industries are essentially the same. The tobacco industry has a proven record of manipulation, deception, corruption and law violations. It cannot be trusted. By recruiting newborns to nicotine addiction, Vape products are helping the cigarette industry not be able to do cigarettes effectively. Public health experts across India unanimously and consistently stated that e-cigarettes would increase rather than reduce India's public health problems.
India is already struggling to control many addictions such as tobacco, alcohol, esque nuts and cannabis. Adding a new addiction will make the situation worse.
4 Why has India not adopted ENDS as a strategy to end?
It is strange that manufacturers themselves do not claim that their products are an aid to tobacco cessation. To our knowledge, e-cigarette manufacturers have never applied to be classified as a termination device in any country. The Drug Controller of India has certified that they have not received any application from any e-cigarette manufacturer. There is no evidence to prove that ENDS is indeed an effective termination tool. After all, 80% of those who use ESDS for cessation are addicted to nicotine.
Nicotine is a harmful chemical and potentially carcinogenic. On the ground, most ENDS are being used for non-termination purposes. As America experiences, it entices youngsters to smoke.