Category: Also in TR

also-in-tr.jpg

Heated Breakthrough

Greentank is at the forefront of innovation with the launch of its patented Heating Chip technology.
By Timothy S. Donahue
The vaping industry is in a constant state of innovation, primarily driven by advancements in hardware. A significant focus has been on enhancing battery quality as well as the electronics and circuitry within vaping systems. Notably, there have been substantial advancements in atomization technology. This includes the development from traditional wire coils and wicks to a more progressive adoption of ceramic materials.
Atomization technology is crucial because the heating element functions as the core of a vaping system. The coil’s role in atomizing e-liquid is pivotal; the more efficient the element, the better the aerosol production, consistency and flavor. Recently, a leading technology company announced its breakthrough in heating technology, set to revolutionize the market.
It has been seven years since a significant advance has been made in atomization technology. Enter Greentank: a company with a wholly new design representing a dramatic step-change from the conventional ceramic and wicked coil systems prevalent in many of today’s vaping products, promising enhanced safety, performance and experience.
Greentank is a business-to-business technology company that specializes in the design, development and manufacturing of precision-made inhalation devices and atomization technology, according to CEO Dustin Koffler. Greentank’s latest innovation in atomization is called Quantum Vape. It replaces cotton wick and ceramic heating elements with a state-of-the-art patented Heating Chip.
According to Koffler, the Heating Chip outperforms all other leading atomization products. For example, the Heating Chip performs better on key safety metrics such as harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) and heavy metal testing than other leading technologies in the market. It also produces the “absolute greatest” release of flavor and the most consistent consumer experience from the first draw to the last, he says.
“With this breakthrough in inhalation science, we’ve catapulted beyond the current generation of atomization technology,” said Koffler. “Our Heating Chip is set to disrupt the global market. It’s a distinct departure from anything currently available. While many companies focus merely on tweaking the substrates and print materials used in ceramic-based systems, they remain bound to the same ceramic foundation.
“They’re refining ceramics—making components slightly smaller, slightly tighter, experimenting with new materials and formulations. Greentank, however, is pioneering an entirely novel approach that’s unlike anything witnessed in the industry before.”
The Heating Chip is small. It comfortably fits on a fingertip and is one-fifth the size of today’s heating solutions. However, Koffler said its high-performance standards are due to advances that have never been achieved before with atomization. Typically, in a ceramic heating element, over time, flavor starts to dissipate naturally. This is because there is caking or buildup inside the pores of the ceramic, causing the temperature throughout the ceramic to vary after each use, leading to thermal cycling. With the Heating Chip, there is zero potential for thermal cycling, according to Greentank; every puff tastes the same as the first.
“The Heating Chip employs a unique capillary action to draw the oil through the heating element, ensuring that each puff initiates a fresh cycle of material,” explained Koffler. “Many products boast consistent flavor throughout use, yet we’re all aware that the current market offerings fall short in maintaining this throughout the life of the product. In contrast, the Heating Chip integrates nanofabrication into its design.
“The entire manufacturing process is proprietary, involving novel methods to assemble materials into the Heating Chip that emits no ceramic particle emissions and contains the lowest levels of harmful and potentially harmful constituents. While it’s not feasible to claim complete absence, third-party testing and rigorous chemical analysis have found these HPHCs to be at undetectable levels.”
Additionally, Greentank only recently completed a longevity study using the Heating Chip in one of the company’s proprietary electronic nicotine-delivery system devices with a target of 15,000 puffs. “We easily achieved this target while demonstrating consistent vapor output from the first puff to the 15,000th puff,” explained Koffler. “Furthermore, we provided these same devices, along with new ones, to Labstat International to conduct aerosol analysis for both carbonyls and metals. The results showed that there was no difference in the safety efficacy from the first puff to the 15,000th puff.”

Technically Speaking
To a scientist, it’s a micro channel-based aerosol generator that delivers sub-micron particles according to its proprietary design. To the average consumer, it’s a smoother experience with maximum flavor intensity in a less-risky delivery than currently marketed e-cigarette and cannabis vape products. The Heating Chip isn’t anything like ceramics, said Koffler. Porosity isn’t inconsistent. It’s a chip with thousands of small holes and microchannels that allow for a superior level of precision and control in the atomizing process.
One of the major challenges in designing the Heating Chip was finding the right talent to help develop the manufacturing process, said Koffler. The manufacturing of the Heating Chip requires specialized equipment, and bringing together a system that worked was incredibly complicated. The manufacturing of the Heating Chip can be compared to producing semiconductors.
“By adapting pioneering techniques from other advanced industries and tailoring them to meet our specific requirements, we’ve enhanced our technology’s performance,” Koffler revealed. “The expertise of our global team, the precision of the equipment we utilize and our methodical focus on perfecting one aspect of the process at a time has been instrumental in overcoming the challenges we faced.”
The next generation of atomization technology is moving away from ceramics, according to Koffler. The Heating Chip technology avoids all heavy metal leaching and ceramic particle emissions and ensures the lowest HPHCs all while permitting an unprecedented taste and consistency over a longer lifetime.
It also offers a smoother experience and better mouth dispersion. Interestingly, the device is also able to create particulate matter small enough to reach lower lung absorption levels for nicotine, much like combustible cigarettes. This could be a giant innovation in getting smokers to adapt to less risky nicotine-delivery systems.
“Utilizing microfluidic channel technology, we’ve engineered a system that precisely controls aerosol nucleation and optimizes particle size, enriching the sensory experience while maximizing intensity without any harshness,” Koffler detailed. “Our design includes independently arranged channels and a thin film interface that safeguards against chemical reactions and thermal decomposition. This architecture not only enhances flavor fidelity and ensures consistent temperature but also elevates safety standards and reduces potential harm significantly. From the outset, our goal was to achieve unparalleled performance and safety.”
The size of the Heating Chip is incredible. It’s tiny. It’s one-fifth the size and 100 times the precision of any ceramic atomizer on the market today, according to Koffler. Its reduced size creates greater design flexibility and quicker response times. The Heating Chip is produced on sophisticated micro- electromechanical systems (MEMS) machinery. MEMS is a general term for forming a micron-level three-dimensional structure on a support substrate such as a silicon wafer and integrating functions such as electronic circuits, sensors and actuators.
“Unlike the broad, imprecise methods typical of ceramic manufacturing, our approach from start to finish is meticulously controlled and exact,” explained Koffler. “This precision is why developing the right equipment for producing the Heating Chip was an extensive process. The level of control we achieve with the MEMS technology not only enhances consistency but also opens up revolutionary possibilities in precise dosing for pharmaceutical applications. This capability to finely tune dosages is a game changer in both vaping and medical fields.”

Future Markets
Based in Toronto, Canada, Greentank doesn’t produce nicotine. It doesn’t manufacture e-liquids or cannabis products. At its core, Greentank is a technology and product development company with a focus on safety, performance and reliability. The Heating Chip is not made from ceramics. While the material is proprietary, Koffler insists the technology is something new and its application in inhalation products is only scratching the surface of its potential. It is designed specifically for multiple verticals, predominantly electronic nicotine-delivery systems but also pharmaceuticals and wellness products.
“We have expanded to over 100 employees across Canada, the U.S., the U.K., Singapore and China, with the majority focused on research and development,” Koffler detailed. “We’ve assembled a highly skilled manufacturing team to produce our innovative chip and have strengthened our engineering and material science capabilities. Last summer, we acquired Numerical Design, a company specializing in microfluidics and microfabrication, boasting an extensive portfolio of patents that further strengthen our intellectual property. This strategic expansion underscores our commitment to leading the edge in technology and manufacturing excellence.”
Greentank spent over three years developing and testing the technology surrounding the Heating Chip and its manufacturing process. Additionally, it has been created with a robust intellectual property portfolio involving more than 50 patent families to bring forward a variety of advancements. The company’s technology is manufactured in ISO-certified labs, and all products undergo third-party testing.
The technology is completely different from what exists in today’s inhalation devices. It gives Greentank the flexibility to be adopted into various inputs and varying viscosities. For example, it works well with both low-viscosity water-based e-liquids and high-viscosity resin oils from cannabis materials.
In March of 2023, Greentank announced that it successfully closed a $16.5 million Series B financing round led by a strategic investor group with more than 15 years of manufacturing experience. The total investment in Greentank to date is now reported at $38.5 million.
“Our Series B funding was a strategic move to elevate our operations from industrial prowess to global commercialization,” said Koffler. “We’ve established a 20,000-square-foot cutting-edge R&D and manufacturing facility, a project that spanned 18 months to build and equip with the most advanced technology needed to scale our Heating Chip.
“This facility not only pushes the limits of what’s possible with specialized equipment and expertise but is also designed with flexibility in mind. Our vision was to create a model that can be replicated anywhere in the world, preparing us to expand into any other market as we continue to grow our business.”
The expansion of the business is about phases, and Koffler said that during the next phase, whether that be the medical or wellness industry, Greentank needs to be able to produce chips to meet global demand with scale in mind. Koffler said this means that the company will look to leverage automation.
Koffler emphasized that the real measure of Greentank’s success will be seen as the next generation of inhalation devices hits the market. He highlighted that numerous devices are on the cusp of being launched, with the Heating Chip poised to redefine industry benchmarks for safety and efficiency. Currently, Greentank is aiming to influence tobacco harm reduction significantly.
“At Greentank, our commitment extends beyond mere compliance with regulatory standards; we are dedicated to establishing new paradigms of transparency and consumer safety,” said Koffler. “We are not just participating in the market—we are leading it toward a safer and better future.”
Timothy Donahue is the assistant editor of Tobacco Reporter. Since joining our team in January 2013, he has become not only an expert on the traditional tobacco business but also a well-respected voice in the rapidly developing vapor industry. Tim spends much of his time on the road, attending conferences and interviewing industry representatives. His networking skills, work ethic and quick mind are valuable assets to our diverse audience.

June 1, 2024
Revenant Rule

Image: MarijaBazarova
Canada’s new health minister is breathing new life into a 2021 proposal to ban vape flavors nationwide.
By Stefanie Rossel
Thomas Kirsop
There’s life in the old dog yet: In March 2024, Canada relaunched a three-year-old plan to ban all vape flavors except tobacco, mint and menthol. The regulations were first published in June 2021 in the Canada Gazette, signaling the government’s intention to implement the flavor ban within six months after the obligatory public consultation. But the rule that was supposed to launch in January 2022 never came, and Canada’s health authorities never mentioned the flavor ban again—until Health Minister Mark Holland, in office since July last year, recently revived the idea.
Outrage about the proposed ban among vapers, consumer advocacy groups and the vape industry was as huge in 2021 as it is now: Canada’s planned rule goes further than most flavor bans, which tend to prohibit only certain “characterizing flavors” or flavor descriptors. Under the Canadian proposal, all sweeteners in vaping products would be prohibited, and vape manufacturers would be allowed to create their liquids using only approved ingredients.
They would have to select from a list of 82 approved compounds, 40 of which can be used to impart a tobacco flavor and 42 of which can be used to impart flavor of mint, menthol or a combination of the two. “Menthol tobacco” or a “mint tobacco” are off limits under the rules.
“Should the flavor ban be adopted as it was written in 2021, Canadian users of vaping products will see the removal of nearly all existing flavor profiles in the legitimate vaping products market within 180 days of publication of the proposed order and regulation from 2021,” says Thomas Kirsop, managing director of Canada’s Vaping Industry Trade Association (VITA).
“The only two products on the market that would not require removal or reformulation would be ‘unflavored’ liquids and unadulterated ‘menthol.’ All existing ‘tobacco’-flavored vaping products would need to be removed from the market, reformulated to remove sweeteners and flavoring compounds not on the permitted constituents list and then reintroduced to the Canadian market.”
The proposed rule would also prescribe “sensory attributes standards,” which are defined only vaguely, stipulating, for example, that a vaping product or its emissions should not have “sensory attributes that result in a sensory perception other than one that is typical of tobacco or mint/menthol,” thus limiting manufacturers’ ability to make vape products that have “a highly pleasant smell or taste.”
“Sensory attributes regulations are referenced over 40 times in the proposal, but there is no specific section explaining how these regulations would be drafted, implemented or enforced in a clear manner,” says Kirsop. The VITA interprets this part of the planned regulation as meaning that manufacturers can make their liquids using the 82 permitted compounds, and at some time in the future, the government will pay a third party to smell, taste and possibly vape this product. “If that third party thinks that the liquid does not align with the permitted flavor profiles or is ‘too palatable,’ then that formulation will be prohibited regardless of its adherence to all the objective standards in legislation,” says Kirsop.
Relapse to Combustibles Expected
The impact of such a regulation on Canada’s 1.5 million vapers would be dramatic, according to Kirsop. His organization anticipates a major relapse to combustible cigarettes among consumers. “The number of cigarettes consumed per capita will increase,” he says. “It is well understood that vaping products and combustible products are economic substitutes in the nicotine market. A regulatory impact on one will result in an inverse reaction of the other.”
Kirsop refers to a 2023 study by Abigail Friedman that investigated the effects of e-cigarette flavor restrictions on tobacco product sales in the U.S. and found that while the flavor restriction did impact vaping rates in the manner intended, the impact on legitimate cigarette sales was substantial, with 12 extra cigarettes sold in the legitimate market for every 0.7 mL pod not sold due to a flavor ban. The VITA has similarly calculated that a nationwide flavor ban in Canada would result in additional cigarette sales of almost 4 billion sticks per year.
For the country’s independent vape manufacturers and estimated 1,800 specialty vaping product shops, such a measure would have a significant, possibly existential, impact, according to Kirsop. “It is the variety of flavored vaping products that make a specialty store economically viable,” he says. The illicit market, by contrast, would receive a boost, especially if the flavor ban comes on top of the 12 percent federal vape product tax hike planned for July.
“From any historical reference point, the removal of a product with significant consumer demand from the legitimate market will result in that demand being met by the illicit market,” says Kirsop. “Our investigations lead us to believe that the black market will expand quite rapidly to fill the void. Our only question is whether that illicit trade will favor small players, producing flavored liquids in garages and basements, if it will follow the Australian model, with organized crime groups importing flavored disposable vaping products from overseas, or if it will be some hybrid combination of both.”
There are plenty of cautionary examples close to home. Six of Canada’s 13 provinces and territories have already restricted the sales of e-cigarettes to tobacco-flavored varieties. “In Nova Scotia, over 40 percent of specialty vape stores closed immediately following the flavor ban, and when VITA commissioned an investigations company to survey the market, we found significant illicit trade and a consumer outlook that supported that illicit trade,” says Kirsop. “News reports showed that in the year after the flavor ban, tobacco excise collection increased 13.6 percent. We also identified that consumers are starting to adapt by adding their own third-party commercial flavoring products to vaping liquids.”
Goal Missed
Maria Papaioannoy
Kirsop says it’s too early to determine the impact of flavor bans on youth usage. However, the VITA has found no data that differentiate Nova Scotia, which was the first province to ban flavored vaping products, from provinces that kept them on the market or banned them at a later date. “Nova Scotia shows youth past-30-day vaping behavior has dropped from 25.1 percent to 23 percent since their flavor ban,” says Kirsop. “However, all provinces except Quebec saw youth vaping rates drop in the same category during that time frame, and some of them did significantly better. Alberta saw youth use drop from 19.9 [percent] to 14.8 percent, British Columbia 27.6 [percent] to 16 percent, Manitoba 21.5 [percent] to 16.7 percent and Saskatchewan 29.6 [percent] to 23.7 percent. All the latter have no bans on flavors.”
So, while the intended impact on adolescents remains questionable, the effect on adults would be devastating, according to Maria Papaioannoy of Rights4Vapers. “Flavors are a critical part of what makes vaping such an effective alternative to cigarettes,” she wrote in a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. “If a person who smokes decides to move to vaping, they do not want to be reminded of the taste of tobacco.” A ban on flavors as proposed, she argues, would mean a prohibition of the entire category through the back door. “Who would pay for an unpalatable product?”
In 2021, Rights4Vapers started a letter-writing campaign, resulting in more than 20,000 Canadians submitting arguments to Health Canada against the proposed regulation. Papaioannoy has organized a similar campaign now. To date, the government has received more than 27,000 letters from adult consumers raising concerns over this ban. In mid-March, Papaioannoy spoke at Health Canada’s stakeholder meeting but left disillusioned. “Consumers had a huge voice in vaping regulation with previous health ministers,” she says. “In this call, all I felt from Health Canada representatives was sympathy, not compassion.”
Like many, Papaioannoy believes that the proposed flavor prohibition is not so much an action of bureaucracy but a mandate being driven by Holland, who formerly worked for the nongovernmental organization Heart and Stroke, a known opponent of vaping.
Both tobacco harm reduction activists hope that as lawmakers debate the measure, reason will prevail. “The wild card is the minister of health,” says Kirsop. “Generally, one would think that policy decisions that could impact millions of Canadian smokers and 1.5 million adult Canadian users of vaping products would be based on scientific data and academic literature and not driven by emotional talking points and flag waving.
“This minister has demonstrated that he has no grounding in literature or the science, and it does not appear at this point that he cares much for it if it does not align with his ideology or that of his former peer group. Ideology forms a very poor starting point for public health decisions.”
Papaioannoy is more optimistic, noting that the proposal still has to go through the Treasury Board of Canada, with the time frame between proposing and enacting being long and opposition strong against a measure that would affect small businesses. “Besides, I believe in the institution,” she says. “Someone from the government will raise the flag.”
Stefanie Rossel is Tobacco Reporter’s editorial contributor. An experienced trade journalist, she combines sharp reporting skills with in-depth knowledge of the tobacco and vapor industries. Prior to joining Tobacco Reporter, Stefanie was editor-in-chief at Tobacco Journal International, where she worked for a decade. Fluent in English, German and French, Stefanie covers tobacco news around the world. She is based in Germany.

June 1, 2024
Losing Steam

Photo: Ned Snowman
Heated-tobacco products continue to eat into the sales of combustible cigarettes in Japan, albeit at a slower pace than before.
By Stefanie Rossel
This year marks the 10th anniversary of IQOS’ debut in Japan. Within a decade, Philip Morris International’s heated-tobacco product (HTP) has changed the country’s tobacco market beyond recognition. HTPs accounted for 37.9 percent of all tobacco sales in Japan last year. In January 2023, HTP sales for the first time overtook cigarette sales in Tokyo, accounting for 50.4 percent of consumer takeoff, according to PMI figures presented at the CAGNY conference in February 2024.
Perhaps the only tobacco market to have experienced a similarly seismic shift among product categories is Sweden, where the popularity of snus has altered consumption patterns to such an extent that its smoking rate will likely fall below 5 percent at some point this year. In both countries, smoking rates declined not as a result of anti-tobacco policies but due to consumers spontaneously opting for safer alternatives when presented with such options.
Until the advent of the new category, Japan was long considered a smokers’ paradise, and it still is one of the world’s largest tobacco markets, with more than 17 million Japanese smoking regularly. Japan’s ministry of finance still owns 30 percent of Japan Tobacco, the successor to the country’s tobacco monopoly, thus benefiting from high tax revenues.
For decades, the industry was able to flourish in a relatively unrestricted market. Low prices and moderate regulations facilitated consumption, with smoking incidence peaking at close to 50 percent of the population in the 1960s. Smoking, mostly a male habit in Japan, started declining slowly after the introduction of a series of anti-smoking regulations. More measures took effect when Japan hosted the 2020 Olympic Games and faced external pressure to crack down on the habit. Extensive public smoking bans contributed to a drop in smoking prevalence from 28 percent in 2002 to 16.2 percent in 2022, according to the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World. But while cigarette sales decreased at a leisurely annual rate of 1.8 percent between 2011 and 2015, they started dropping much faster after the arrival of HTPs.
Japan is an ideal place to study the impact of HTPs. The country prohibits the sale of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes, which are classified as pharmaceutical products and can be purchased only with a prescription in medically licensed shops whereas non-nicotine vape products are freely available. In addition, Japanese consumers are health-conscious, tech-savvy and receptive to new gadgets. Values such as discretion and politeness are deeply rooted in Japanese culture, meaning that smokers in the densely populated country are keen to avoid bothering others, for example, through secondhand smoke.

Heated-tobacco products continue to enjoy a tax advantage over combyustible cigarettes in Japan, but this may change in the future. (Photo: Taco Tuinstra)
A Mature Market
Ten years into the introduction of the category, however, fascination appears to have worn off a little, with HTP sales plateauing during the past few years. According to Euromonitor International, the retail value generated by HTPs in Japan fell from $11.14 billion in 2022 to an estimated $11.13 billion in 2023 and will reach $11.23 billion this year. Japan nevertheless remains by far the leading market of the category, representing almost a third of the expected global retail volume of $40.59 billion this year, well ahead of Italy, which now ranks second with an estimated HTP market value of $6.511 billion in 2024.
IQOS continues to dominate the Japanese HTP market with a share of 70.5 percent in 2023, according to PMI. A survey commissioned by Statista revealed that IQOS Iluma was the most popular HTP in Japan between July 2023 and August 2023, with more than 21.1 percent of respondents using the product. IQOS Iluma One was the second most popular heating product, with a share of 20.7 percent of respondents. It was followed by JT’s Ploom X with 19.4 percent and British American Tobacco’s Glo Hyper+ with 12.9 percent.
The maturity of Japan’s HTP market has sparked a fierce battle for market share among the leading manufacturers. Price competition is increasing, and consumers are experimenting with other brands and devices while manufacturers are subsidizing products and launching new models.
In October, BAT lowered the prices of six Lucky Strike consumable variants for its Glo Hyper device after it had already cut the prices of 19 of its Glo Hyper products by ¥40 ($0.25) to ¥50 on Aug. 1, 2023, in an attempt to boost its market share. A pack of 20 Lucky Strike heat sticks now retails at ¥400.
Tax Differential in Danger
Japan also saw a series of new HTP launches in the past year, all focusing on improved performance and enhanced flavor delivery. In July 2023, JT introduced With 2, an infused tobacco vapor device under its respective new brand With. The product features JT’s infused technology, which generates vapor while an atomized liquid passes through a capsule containing granulated tobacco, and has been available at convenience stores and tobacco stores in Japan since September.
According to the company, there is no delay in nicotine delivery, as tobacco vapor is generated the moment it’s inhaled, and there is almost no tobacco smoke with the product since tobacco leaves are not directly heated. Following the launch, JT discontinued its Ploom Tech, Ploom Tech+ and Ploom Tech+ With devices for infused tobacco capsules. The recommended retail price for the With 2 device is ¥1,980, including tax, while a pack of the respective tobacco capsules under the Mevius brand retails at ¥580.
In November 2023, JT started selling Ploom X Advanced in Japan. The device, which replaces the Ploom X model, comes with an upgraded heating system. Named “Power Heatflow,” this technology increases the maximum heating temperature from 295 degrees Celsius to 320 degrees Celsius to provide a richer flavor experience. Charging time is reduced from 110 minutes for the previous model to around 90 minutes. The device is sold at a suggested tax-included retail price of ¥1,980.
In January, BAT presented the most recent version of its Glo heating device, Glo Hyper Pro, in Japan. Charging takes about 90 minutes, allowing for use for 20 sessions. This compares to 210 minutes for Hyper X2, 120 minutes for Hyper Air and 135 minutes for IQOS Iluma, according to BAT. The Glo Hyper Pro also features a new screen displaying performance settings and information as well as a new “HeatBoost” technology for better taste. At ¥3,980, the device sells in the same price category as IQOS Iluma, which retails at ¥3,980 to ¥9,980, depending on the discount, but is more expensive than the now discontinued Ploom X, which could be purchased for as little as ¥980 after discount.
To mark the 10th anniversary of IQOS’ introduction in Nagoya, PMI in March 2024 chose Japan for the launch of its Iluma i-series, the next generation of Iluma devices, which comes with a series of new features, such as a touch-screen that allows users to view the relevant information easily, and a pause mode that enables users to stop and resume their use and thus reduce waste. The device is adaptive to use patterns, and the holder’s battery has a longer life span, according to PMI. Retail prices range between ¥3,980 for Iluma One i and ¥9,980 for the premium model, Iluma Prime i.
Intensive competition has caused IQOS devices to be significantly less expensive in Japan than in other markets.
As manufacturers fight for market share, they may lose another advantage. One factor that helped HTPs gain ground in Japan was their favorable taxation. When the products debuted in this market, they were taxed at between 10 percent and 70 percent of the combustible cigarette rates due to their small amount of tobacco.
Takes hikes between 2018 and 2022 raised those levels to between 70 percent and 90 percent. Seeking to boost its defense spending, the Japanese government in late 2022 proposed to gradually raise HTP taxes until they reach the level of cigarettes in 2027. According to The Mainichi newspaper, the government had not made a decision on the tax hikes by early 2024. If it decides to move forward, however, the measure will likely further decelerate the growth of Japan’s HTP market.
Stefanie Rossel is Tobacco Reporter’s editorial contributor. An experienced trade journalist, she combines sharp reporting skills with in-depth knowledge of the tobacco and vapor industries. Prior to joining Tobacco Reporter, Stefanie was editor-in-chief at Tobacco Journal International, where she worked for a decade. Fluent in English, German and French, Stefanie covers tobacco news around the world. She is based in Germany.

June 1, 2024
Passing the Torch

SPI Development’s new building the has enabled the company to bring together people working on similar aspects of the company’s business within discrete areas, while facilitating communications and increasing comfort. | Photo: SPI Development
Danielle Roxborough takes the helm from Henry Tuck as SPI Developments enjoys a period of steady growth.
By George Gay
Danielle Roxborough
Talk to a lot of people, especially those not working within the tobacco industry, and they will tell you the industry is in decline. They will tell you that smoking rates are falling in many markets and plummeting in some others. And there is truth in this, though it raises a question about how, for instance, the U.K.-based fluids control company, SPI Developments, which is heavily involved in the industry, has been expanding and is expecting to continue to expand. But SPI’s managing director, Danielle Roxborough, has a rather neat explanation for this apparent enigma. The tobacco industry had not declined, she told me in April; it had been shaken up, and, consequently, a lot of new opportunities had been exposed to the light.
I was speaking on the telephone with Roxborough and Henry Tuck during a management transition period when she was still business development manager and managing director designate and he was preparing to stand down as MD on May 31.
In his own way, Tuck endorsed Roxborough’s view of what had happened, saying that since joining BAT and starting what was to become a 40-year career in engineering, mostly in the tobacco industry, he had seen the consolidation of the industry’s manufacturing base but an expansion of its products. What had been an industry concentrated on producing traditional tobacco cigarettes that were largely unchanged over decades was now also producing a range of new generation products that were being frequently updated and replaced. The life spans of these new products were short, Tuck noted, and every new iteration came with potential opportunities for SPI.
While SPI has always had a good foothold in flavor application equipment, this year has seen a major increase in orders.
Vote of Confidence
That SPI, which is part of the Tembo group of companies, has confidence in the future was underlined about six months ago when it moved within its hometown of Rotherham, Yorkshire, into a new building that Roxborough described as being “expansion proof.” The new facility has allowed the coming together of SPI and its subsidiary A1, which is responsible for machining components for SPI’s equipment. The two companies used to operate from premises on opposite sides of the road on which they were sited but are now housed together in a single unit that provides more space for all aspects of the company’s operations.
To give an idea of the size of the new premises and what the move means, Roxborough explained that whereas previously, space limitations had meant that engineers had struggled to build even a single RWM, the company’s biggest machine that applies menthol to the tissue side of foil bobbins, earlier this year, they had built three simultaneously. In addition, the new space had allowed what Tuck described as significant investments to be made in new turning and milling machinery, which space limitations would not have allowed previously. All in all, what these developments added up to was an increase in productivity and a reduction in lead times.
The move has also allowed the bringing together of people working on similar aspects of the company’s business within discrete areas but also an improvement in communications between those areas, a general increase in comfort and a consequent boost in morale. And, of course, there are the intangibles. Tuck said that the building had given the company a bigger, more professional feel while Roxborough reflected on how the new building’s glass frontage provided much natural light, saying, “it is amazing what it can do for your day.”
Cross-Fertilizations
As well as operating out of a new facility under a new MD, SPI has a relatively new designation as a fluid control company, something that stems from its status as the fluids expert within the Tembo group, from the business cross-fertilizations provided through cooperating with other members of the group and from the need to keep abreast of the expanded requirements and horizons thrown up by the arrival on the market of modified cigarettes and new generation tobacco and nicotine products. Roxborough said that whereas most of SPI’s equipment was concerned with the application of adhesives and flavors to cigarettes, filters and heat-not-burn (HnB) products, the company now found itself involved in projects and R&D efforts involving different fluids, either within or without the tobacco industry.
An example of the way in which the cross-fertilization of ideas can be exploited occurred some time ago when it was realized that a spiral-wound and glued paper tube being developed for an HnB project had basically produced a prototype paper drinking straw at a time when the EU was looking to ban single-use plastic drinking straws. And a bigger project has seen SPI involved with a sister Tembo company in detergent dosing systems for detergent pod manufacturing machines.
Drivers of Demand
But the focus is nevertheless on the tobacco industry, where a major driver of demand has been the need in some markets to replace cellulose acetate filters because of regulatory requirements and/or environmental concerns. Whereas the technology governing the production of cellulose filters has been largely standardized for some time, that for the current major alternative, crimped-paper filters, is still evolving, so SPI finds itself working with customers on different methods of applying various fluids to paper filters to help reproduce the taste generated through cellulose filters, to which smokers have become accustomed. In the future, such projects will likely widen to take in materials other than paper.
Another driver is being provided by HnB products and the fact that increasing numbers of companies are producing their own versions. Tuck said that while traditional cigarettes were fairly standard and so the technology used to manufacture them was standard, in the case of HnB products, companies were being innovative and including different materials. Product lifetimes could be as short as three years or four years, after which it was a matter of working with the customer on the next iteration as part of an ongoing process. This manner of working represented a fundamental change from that which had guided the traditional tobacco product industry.
But while the need to work in new ways with new materials is driving additional demand, the fundamentals of SPI’s business keep going. Roxborough said that while SPI had always had a good foothold in flavor application equipment, this year had seen a major increase in orders. And there had been solid demand, too, for upgrades of glue application systems.
Manageable Growth
Roxborough, who studied communications but who has filled commercial roles since graduating from university, has spent her 22-year career working with engineering companies, almost entirely those serving the tobacco industry. She has been with SPI for more than nine years and admits to being passionate about the company—a passion that tips over into confidence about the future. Joining the Tembo group had been hugely positive for the company, providing it with the opportunity to grow at a manageable pace, she said. And looking to the future, SPI and A1 had a great team of about 30 U.K.-based employees, including designers and engineers who could react quickly to new challenges emerging in the field of fluid control. At the same time, it could call on the resources of other Tembo group companies around the world.
Although Tuck has now left the business after 18 years, Roxborough is not short of experienced support. Paul Leverick, who Tuck described as a “fantastic engineer” and who is the founder and chairman of SPI, is still in place, ready to mentor the younger engineers and the management team. It was Leverick and Tuck, the shareholders of SPI, who realized that the long-term future of SPI lay with ITM, later to become the Tembo group, and who sold it when that opportunity arose in 2018.
Taking Hurdles in Stride
They also helped steer the company through Brexit and the Covid pandemic. Tuck was reluctant to spend much time talking about Brexit, but it was clear from what he did say that he was not a fan. Brexit, he said, had cost SPI time and administrative effort, but the company had nevertheless taken these hurdles in its stride and would continue to do so—because EU legislative changes would be ongoing and would continue to have an impact on any company such as SPI that exported to the EU.
In respect of the pandemic, the decision was taken early on that it was not viable for everybody to go home, so the company kept going while taking measures to keep its people safe, including by allowing those who were able to do so to work from home. In the end, the pandemic had little impact on the business, apart from the adjustments that had to be made to introduce the remote installation of equipment.
With the sale of SPI to the Tembo group, the Covid pandemic, Brexit and the move to the new building, the past six years have been busy, but then so were the previous 12 years. When Tuck joined SPI as MD in 2006, the company had only four other employees, and it offered only PVA glue systems and a simple flavor application system. Now it has 30 employees, a much-expanded equipment offering and is part of a multinational group.
Looking back, Tuck described working in the tobacco industry as being very interesting. As an engineer, he had found it “technically amazing” while the opportunity to travel the world had been mind-expanding. He would remember the industry as comprising a group of people who were open and welcoming.
Finally, Tuck said that one of his more recent goals had been to move the company into a new building, and now that had happened. “I’m very happy with the management team; they are doing very well, and we have a good order book, so now is a good time to go,” he said.
Leading the Livery
Henri Tuck
Although the accompanying story implies that Henry Tuck, until May 31 the managing director of SPI Developments, has left the tobacco industry, this is not strictly true. From June 5, he was due to have been elected and installed for one year as the master of the U.K.’s Worshipful Company of Tobacco Pipe Makers and Tobacco Blenders, of which he has been a member for about 10 years.
Tuck, who used to have a long commute between his home and SPI’s premises, said that, since the Covid pandemic had struck, he had spent increasing amounts of time working from home, relying on the company’s management team for SPI’s day-to-day running. Basically, he added, he had been working himself out of a job and that, though he was shy of normal retirement age, it had made sense to leave in time to take on his new role, which would comprise a full-on year, chairing and running the livery company, and attending internal and external events in the city of London.
The livery company has its foundations in the craft of clay pipe making, a craft that it is trying to keep going. There are two or three people left in the U.K. who make clay pipes for a small market comprising mainly those working in period films and dramas and those running reenactment societies. The company has a benevolent fund that helps various charities that fit its criteria, and within which is a welfare fund for former tobacco workers in the U.K. who have fallen on hard times.
The company, which has close to 200 members, is one of 111 such companies in London that together donate about £75 million ($93.91 million) a year to charitable causes. Education, too, is a big part of the livery movement, and some companies have maintained traditional functions, such as supporting apprenticeships.
It is worth noting that Tuck was introduced to the livery company by the person who preceded him as master, Elise Rasmussen, the founder and chief director of the GTNF (Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum) Trust and vice president of sales and marketing at the U.S. Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association, which owns Tobacco Reporter. Tuck said that Rasmussen had been a great success in the role and that it would be hard to fill her shoes. She was known by everybody in the city and the livery movement. “Once met, never forgotten,” he said. —G.G.
George Gay is Tobacco Reporter’s European editor, but his territory spans the globe. Based in London, George has covered the tobacco industry since 1982, initially for a U.K.-based publication and since 2004 for Tobacco Reporter. George’s understanding of industry issues, combined with his keen sense of observation and dry wit, have earned him a loyal following among Tobacco Reporter’s readers.

June 1, 2024
Pulling its Punches

Photo: Christoph Burgstedt
China, the world’s largest supplier of e-cigarettes, has failed to take full advantage of the risk reduction opportunities offered by vapes.
By George Gay
An Aug. 27 heading on a story in Singapore’s The Straits Times proclaimed, “300 million and counting: Why China just can’t kick the cigarette habit.” Newspaper headings are normally not written by the writers of stories and are aimed at grabbing the reader’s attention, but they should accurately reflect the story. In this case, however, there is a disconnect because whereas the story credits China with having an estimated 300 million smokers, nowhere does it say that number is rising, which I would expect given that the heading adds “and counting.” Indeed, the story does not claim that volume consumption is heading up, saying rather that such figures are not published.
Another thing that immediately struck me about the heading was the use of the word “habit” rather than “addiction,” which seemed to suggest two things. One was that the story was not going to follow the course of many stories in other countries where the failure to end or significantly curtail cigarette smoking is put down to an inability on the part of authorities to force/encourage smokers to break their addiction despite their using methods that include everything from making cigarettes unaffordable through requiring manufacturers to degrade these products and insulting smokers in respect of their personal hygiene, to, if those smokers are lucky, encouraging the use of reduced-risk products in place of cigarettes. This story, the heading promised, was going to be about other issues.
At the same time, the heading seems to question whether kicking smoking is a goal worth pursuing. After all, while the usual definition of addiction involves a compulsion that causes harm to the person indulging in the addictive activity, that is not the case in respect of a habit. After all, somebody might be in the habit of repeatedly looking at their mobile phone while supposedly out enjoying the company of a friend over coffee, which, of itself, is unlikely to cause them direct harm, though they might be in danger from the reaction of a sensitive but increasingly irritated friend sitting across the table, at least in polite societies.
But hang on, the mood changes in the first sentence of the story, which reports that 20 years after adopting the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control [FCTC], “China is still addicted [my emphasis] to cigarettes.” Overall, the word “habit” occurs four times in the story and the word “addicted” twice. This might seem like a small point, but when the subject is what many people believe is the most preventable cause of disease and death worldwide, a reader should be able to expect that basic issues have been properly considered before going to print. English and, I guess, most other languages have what I would call vague words such as “habit” and “addiction,” which can be useful but which need to be used with caution, and clearly not where such vagueness can lead to confusion.
I am not saying that it is not valid to use “habit” and “addiction” in reference to the same activity, but at least some attempt should be made to explain the distinction and to use the words, not as simple synonyms, but appropriately each time. I might be happy, for instance, to entertain the idea that for some people, smoking is an addiction that is difficult to break while for others it is a habit they can pick up now and again without becoming addicted, but I cannot accept that for the same individual, smoking can be both a habit and an addiction.
Muddled Thinking
I worry that such issues are not considered properly, not only in the case of the The Straits Times but in stories published around the world every day of the week, something that leads to misunderstandings and pressure being put on politicians to enact unhelpful legislation. The public is served up stories that are beset with muddled thinking. We are told, for instance, in The Straits Times story that despite years of anti-smoking campaigning in China, people continue to smoke partly because cigarettes are cheap, there is a lack of public education, and Big Tobacco—presumably meaning the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration (STMA) and the China National Tobacco Corporation—is protected. But how is it possible to reconcile the claims that there have been years of anti-smoking campaigning when cigarettes are still cheap? The WHO and most other tobacco control bodies say that tax-induced cigarette price increases comprise the most important factor in getting smokers to quit. And there surely cannot have been years of anti-smoking campaigning without public education. I ask you, to whom was this campaigning directed?
I am not saying that the claims are irreconcilable, but they do require some explanation. Is the reason that the extensive anti-tobacco campaigning has been unsuccessful down to the fact that China has followed FCTC policies that, overall, do not work, or that do not work in China, or is it the case that China, either intentionally or unintentionally, has not applied them properly?
In fact, the story suggests that a major reason why anti-tobacco campaigning has had limited success is down to the power of the STMA and the pushback that it employs when anti-smoking policies are put forward, at least outside the biggest cities. I am happy to accept that this happens, but it does raise a question: Why did China sign up to the FCTC when it must have been aware that implementation of its policies was going to be resisted by a powerful state organization? The answer to the first part of the question, why did it sign up to the FCTC, probably comes within the wide-ranging category of “it seemed like a good idea at the time”—perhaps because at that time, China wanted to be seen as part of the international order, or maybe it was for some other, less obvious reason.
The answer to the second part of the question is possibly more interesting. Could it be that China does not buy into all the negative publicity that surrounds tobacco? In many other parts of the world, the perceived wisdom is that tobacco is overall economically negative, but is this the case in China? Isn’t China, along, perhaps, to a lesser extent, with Brazil, something of a special case because its tobacco industry is highly economically active, from the tobacco fields, through manufacturing, to retail stores and throughout all the supporting industries and businesses that these activities imply? Frankly, it would be odd if China took the same attitude to tobacco as, for instance, the U.K., where there is no commercial tobacco growing and virtually no tobacco manufacturing. Differences in the healthcare systems of the two nations might also mean that economic calculations come up with different results.
Could it be, also, that China does not buy into the tobacco health debate in the same way that many other countries do? In a world plagued by pollution, perhaps it finds it hard to accept the death toll normally attributed to tobacco smoking alone, as I do. I can think of other reasons why China might take a different view of cigarette consumption to that taken by some other countries, but I don’t want to encourage a sack full of letters of outrage, so I shall keep them to myself.
A Missed Opportunity
I am not saying that such thinking comes into play in China. In fact, I would be surprised if it does because, strangely, China seems to forge a tobacco path that is not that much different to the paths forged elsewhere and one where, certainly in places, it is aligned with the WHO’s de facto policies.
Take reduced-risk products, for instance. One would have thought that in China, vapes would have comprised a powerful tool for allowing smokers to transition away from cigarettes—perhaps a more powerful tool even than it is in many other countries. I say this because The Straits Times story makes the point that smoking plugs into long-established social mores in China, one of which means that cigarettes are considered appropriate business gifts. Elegantly designed vapes would surely make acceptable—perhaps even better—alternatives in this regard and could be made to reflect the often-elegant, iconic branding of cigarettes.
But China seems not to have taken full advantage of what vapes could offer it, which is especially odd given that, I assume, it is the world’s leading supplier of vaping devices. Rather, it seems to have fallen for the idea that flavored vapes, the vapes most effective in encouraging smokers to switch away from cigarettes, should be banned because they are attractive to young people.
To me, this is the same sort of muddled thinking that crops up time and again in other countries. But at least it possibly provides an answer to the question implied by The Straits Times. Perhaps China will be able one day to break its cigarette “habit,” but, with one hand tied behind its back, it is going to take an awfully long time.
But then the reporter from Singapore should understand this. Singapore, I think, once proclaimed that it would quit smoking by 2000, and that was in the days when “quit” meant just that, not reduce the smoking rate to 5 percent or thereabouts. Did it make that deadline? No; a quarter of a century later, it is still a work in progress, and it is likely to be so for many years to come. It likes to operate with two hands tied behind its back—it bans vaping outright.
George Gay is Tobacco Reporter’s European editor, but his territory spans the globe. Based in London, George has covered the tobacco industry since 1982, initially for a U.K.-based publication and since 2004 for Tobacco Reporter. George’s understanding of industry issues, combined with his keen sense of observation and dry wit, have earned him a loyal following among Tobacco Reporter’s readers.

June 1, 2024
Realists and Idealists
Image: M-SUR
We should celebrate ‘realists’ and beware of ‘idealists.’ Idealists do well in the rhetorical world of goal setting, aspirations and optics while realists do better in the real world. The problem is that the idealists obstruct the realists.
By Clive Bates
On April 22, the British Medical Journal and a new investigative publication, The Examination, funded by billionaire activist Michael Bloomberg, declared a victory. Their “investigation” had shut down a new continuing medical education program in smoking, tobacco and nicotine offered by the respected medical information provider Medscape. The course had been running for a few weeks and had proved popular with participants. It had been designed to address an essential unmet educational need: the widespread confusion among healthcare practitioners about the causes of disease, the nature of nicotine use and the options available to reduce the harms. It’s hard to imagine more valuable and actionable public health and preventative insights for practitioners. So why close it down? Simple: The initiative had been funded at arms-length by a tobacco company, Phillip Morris International, which played no role in developing the content.
It’s worth pausing to examine what has been achieved here. The objection to tobacco company funding in the case is essentially aesthetic. To some activists, it just doesn’t look right. Tobacco companies involved in ending smoking? Weird! No one has presented material objections to the course content. I have no doubt that it was a sincere effort to raise the lamentable standard of medical knowledge in this area delivered by experienced professionals. The idealists were successful in burning this initiative to the ground. But here’s the point: Like arsonists, they didn’t build anything. They have left nothing where there was previously something useful. The activists have made their impassioned denunciations, expressed their righteous anger and moved on. But it’s an empty victory because the confusion and misinformation remain, and the opportunity to do better for the public and patients has been squandered.
I chose this recent example because it illustrates a more general problem with activism. The pursuit of idealistic goals is not necessarily heroic and may not be benign. It can make matters worse with real-world costs for people and the environment. Let’s take three examples from outside the nicotine field to illustrate the point, then return to nicotine.
First, the green opposition to nuclear power. In their quest for an idealist vision of a 100 percent renewable system based mainly on solar and wind power, greens have opposed a proven, reliable, low-carbon form of electricity generation. By creating fear and foreboding about nuclear risks, activists and regulators have made the technology exceedingly expensive and difficult to deploy, making fossil fuels relatively more attractive. The French experience from the 1960s shows successful large-scale nuclear deployment, but idealistic opposition has driven the costs upward since then. Finally, idealists are starting to feel the heat from the climate realists.
Second, activists with an in-principle opposition to genetic engineering recently stopped the deployment of genetically modified golden rice, which is rich in Vitamin A, in the Philippines. Vitamin A deficiency is implicated in up to 500,000 cases of blindness in young children annually in Asia and Africa each year. Maybe it would be better to lift poverty and improve nutrition more systematically, but how long would that take, and how many people would be harmed waiting for the idealists’ more prosperous and just society? Like adding fluoride to water to protect dental health, golden rice would have added Vitamin A to the food supply system, creating widespread health benefits. Now, people will suffer instead.
Third, local and international nonprofit organizations lobbied tenaciously for Sri Lanka to switch its agricultural system to become exclusively organic, backed up by a ban on the use of agrichemicals. They got their way, but it did not go well. The food supply crashed, the people went hungry and rioted, and the government fell.
In each case, a noble aspiration, an eye-catching slogan or a grand commitment has stood in the way of making more mundane but pragmatic progress at the expense of human well-being. Some further characteristics are evident:
Idealists evade the messy and distinctly realist business of trade-offs, waving away the concerns of realists as a lack of ambition or “industry talking points.”
The idealists rarely accept accountability for the unintended consequences of their positions—the fault is with others for not trying hard enough or spending enough to match the idealists’ aspirations.
The idealists often receive an easy ride in the media, especially when they evoke youth to make their case. Did anyone ever put hard questions to Greta Thunberg?
Turning now to the battle between idealists and realists in the world of tobacco and nicotine.
First, the nicotine-free society. The idealists in tobacco control would like to rid us of this relatively benign recreational drug. Sorry, but that will not happen, and there is no reason why it should. People use nicotine because it makes them feel better, for its pleasurable, functional and therapeutic attributes. However, demonizing nicotine and treating all nicotine products as if they are equally harmful will obstruct the realists’ efforts to address the significant harm caused by smoking. The idealists take each ban and blockage of any nicotine product as progress to their larger goal. How else can we explain the sustained ban on snus in the European Union?
Second, defending the purity of youth. Though all idealists have been teenagers at some point, few seem to understand them. Some young people have a propensity for risk-taking with drugs, alcohol, sex and other reckless behaviors, and yes, to use nicotine. But the idealists have adopted variants on the mantra “no teen should use nicotine.” Fine, that might be good advice. But what if they go further and try to make that a reality with various forms of prohibition, restrictions and misinformation? The trouble is that the much larger adult market will be bent out of shape by misguided efforts to protect youth. There will be more smoking, more illicit trade and more risky workarounds, including among youth. The realist goal of providing a lawful, acceptably safe, proportionally regulated nicotine market is undermined by the fervor of the idealists, with worse results for everyone.
Third, the knockout blow. Collectively known as “endgame” measures, these grandiose schemes would abolish cigarettes as we know them, close nearly all retail outlets, impose shrinking production and import quotas, or ban sales to anyone born after a specific date. They have this in common: They won’t be implemented, they won’t work as expected, or they will have little useful effect. But they will obstruct the realists because these ideas divert political, regulatory, scientific capital and creativity into unworkable schemes and away from pragmatic, if humble, measures that will work. Worse, they occupy the imaginary sunlit uplands with a fake utopia, creating a mirage where there should be an achievable destination—a stable, lawful, well-regulated market for a popular drug.
Fourth, the pursuit of paper tigers. I recently submitted evidence to an inquiry into new legislation in South Africa. The new law had been drafted as model anti-vaping legislation with extreme restrictions and penalties and tell-tale fingerprints of American activists. The contrast between the precision control, on paper, of the new law and the chaotic reality of South Africa’s giant illicit market is matched only by that of Australia’s new legislation that tries to ban vapes even harder, even though over 90 percent of the Australian vape market is already illegal. When the idealists declare a prohibition in law on paper, actual or de facto, it doesn’t make the banned products disappear. However, it does mean that more modest regulation becomes impossible because most of the market is unregulated and illicit.
Fifth, why don’t they stop making cigarettes? A common idealist theme is that if tobacco companies are serious about health, they should just stop making cigarettes. It sounds superficially plausible and inspiring. In reality, these companies have a legal duty not to destroy their shareholders’ money. If they tried, three things would happen: The management would be fired, the company would be taken over, or the productive assets and brands would be sold as a going concern. All to no effect. The realists recognize the need for a transformation, moving the market to noncombustible nicotine products and diversifying the business into non-nicotine activities in which they have an advantage, keeping their shareholders on board throughout.
Finally, conflicts of interest (COI). Idealists divide the world into independent and industry science. They see industry conflicts of interest as disqualifying from scholarly societies and journals. Yet, conflicts arise from every funding source or institution with policy preferences. An industry COI may be no more than a sign of having valuable marketable capabilities. The realists want to engage with anyone with specialized knowledge and, with due skepticism, to learn from their insights. The idealists prefer to erase them from the discourse and pursue purity at the expense of knowledge.
To summarize, the idealists will resist the realists, and everything will be worse.
Clive Bates is the director of Counterfactual Consulting and the former director of Action on Smoking and Health (U.K.).
June 1, 2024
Thoughtful Reflection

Photo: Tobacco Reporter archive
Speakers and panelists discussed the nicotine value chain during the InFocus virtual conference.
TR Staff Report
Participants in the May 22 InFocus virtual conference took a close look at the nicotine value chain, covering agriculture, synthetic nicotine products and innovation in tobacco harm reduction, among other topics. Below are some of the highlights of the event, which was sponsored by BAT, FEELM, Smoore, Alliance One International and Universal Leaf.
Michael Strupp, professor of neurology at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, addressed misconceptions about nicotine, stressing that it is not a nitrosamine and does not cause cancer. He emphasized the importance of distinguishing between the nicotine molecule and the substances produced by the combustion of tobacco. Strupp highlighted nicotine’s non-toxic nature and clarified that it is not a pesticide. He further explained that nicotine has potential therapeutic benefits, particularly in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s as well as certain psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia.
Strupp pointed out that nicotine can enhance attention and memory, improve mood by inducing euphoria and relaxation and indirectly influence body functions such as heart rate and blood pressure. Strupp discussed how nicotine’s mechanism of action has been well understood for decades, acting on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the brain. He explained that nicotine mimics acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter, and its interaction with these receptors can enhance learning, memory and attention.
Concluding his keynote, Strupp emphasized the significance of understanding nicotine’s effects from a scientific perspective. He illustrated how the dopamine reward pathway is involved in nicotine addiction, with nicotine mimicking the effects of neurotransmitters like acetylcholine and dopamine.
James Murphy, director of research and science at BAT, reflected on the remarkable transformation within the tobacco industry over his career, particularly with the development of three distinct noncombustible tobacco and nicotine product categories: heated products, vapor products and oral pouches.
As a model for tobacco harm reduction, Murphy highlighted Sweden, where the widespread adoption of snus has led to a dramatic decline in smoking rates to just 5 percent. This shift has resulted in significantly better health outcomes compared to any other country in Europe, demonstrating the potential impact of noncombustible products on public health.
Unfortunately, the promise of noncombustible combustible products is not reflected in consumer perceptions. Research findings indicated that a record percentage of consumers (90 percent in one survey) now believe that the risks associated with noncombustible products are equivalent to those of smoking.
This misperception extends to medical practitioners as well, with a majority surveyed incorrectly attributing nicotine as a direct cause of cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cancer. Murphy emphasized the need for education to correct these misconceptions and overcome barriers preventing adult smokers from switching to lower risk products.
Murphy concluded by underscoring the importance of basing public health guidance on clear, rigorous science. He called for a unified commitment from all stakeholders to prioritize research and harm reduction strategies. A smokeless world, Murphy argued, is achievable through collaborative efforts focused on the well-being of millions worldwide. By dispelling myths and promoting evidence-based understanding of nicotine and noncombustible products, the industry can make significant strides in reducing smoking-related harm.
Participants in the “Misperception of Nicotine” panel stressed the need for accurate information and education regarding nicotine, calling for global efforts to correct misconceptions and promote harm reduction strategies effectively. The panelists collectively highlighted the importance of engaging respectfully with all sides of the debate, basing policies on scientific evidence and ensuring transparency in public health communications.
Moderator Jasjit S. Ahluwalia, professor of behavioral and social sciences and professor of medicine at the Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies at the Brown University School of Public Health and Alpert School of Medicine, opened the panel by emphasizing the need to shift the narrative around nicotine. He pointed out that nicotine is often demonized despite scientific evidence suggesting that it is not the primary cause of smoking-related diseases.
Ahluwalia highlighted a troubling public misconception that marijuana is safer than nicotine, which is not supported by science. He stressed that while nicotine will continue to be used, the focus should be on eliminating combustible tobacco products, which pose the greatest health risks. Ahluwalia also noted that e-cigarettes, though not without risk, are significantly safer than combustible cigarettes and do not cause cancer or COPD.
Ahluwalia called for policies guided by science, advocating for accurate information to be provided to smokers about the benefits of switching to reduced-risk products (RRPs). Engaging with those who disagree is crucial, Ahluwalia argued, as there is much common ground and a shared purpose in harm reduction efforts. He also debunked the myth that nicotine use lowers IQs, stating that such misinformation undermines harm reduction efforts and that governments must play a role in correcting these misconceptions.
Dave Dobbins, former chief operating officer at the American Legacy Foundation/Truth Initiative and consultant to Altria, underscored the importance of listening to all perspectives in the nicotine debate with kindness. He criticized the current tobacco control efforts, which he believes are often led by individuals who are not directly affected by nicotine use.
Dobbins highlighted the severe health consequences of smoking, noting that cigarettes can reduce life expectancy by a decade and kill half of their users. He emphasized that nicotine delivery through RRPs is significantly safer than smoking.
Dobbins called for clear, consistent communication with adult smokers, stressing the need to treat them with respect and provide accurate information about the benefits of vapes and pouches. He asserted that it is the duty of everyone, including cigarette companies, to disseminate accurate information about nicotine. Transparency in the origins and funding of scientific research is crucial to ensure trust and clarity in public health messaging.
Delon Human, a specialist family physician and president of Health Diplomats, began by identifying himself as both a doctor and a consumer, emphasizing the human aspect of smokers. He expressed concern that a significant proportion of doctors (70 percent to 80 percent) incorrectly conflate smoking with nicotine consumption.
Human criticized the World Health Organization for its inconsistent and unclear stance on nicotine, which also conflates tobacco use with nicotine use. He stressed the importance of the WHO and related agencies following scientific evidence. Human highlighted Sweden as an example of a country providing accurate information about nicotine use, resulting in significantly fewer cancer deaths due to the use of snus instead of cigarettes. He argued that scare stories about e-cigarettes need to be countered with scientific facts.
Human pointed out that there is substantial opposition to nicotine within the WHO, which will take time to change. He also criticized Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which excludes the tobacco industry from discussions, arguing that this exclusion damages scientific progress and policy development and ultimately costs lives.
Sudhanshu Patwardhan, nicotine expert and health tech entrepreneur, highlighted a study from the U.K. showing that 44 percent of doctors incorrectly believe nicotine causes cancer—a misconception common worldwide. He pointed out a significant gap between policy and medical understanding, which he said has real-world implications for smokers seeking healthier alternatives.
Patwardhan called for a global nicotine literacy project to educate doctors and align public policies with scientific evidence. He emphasized the importance of making doctors champions of reason to communicate safer alternatives to cigarettes effectively.
Patwardhan also stressed the need for sensible regulation that is supported by and encourages industry involvement. He concluded that educating healthcare providers around the world is key to promoting harm reduction.
David Jones, a member of the U.K. All-Party Parliamentary Group for Responsible Vaping and deputy chair of the European Research Group, emphasized the critical role of tobacco harm reduction in public health policy, highlighting the U.K.’s pioneering “swap to stop” strategy, which provides vape starter kits to smokers to help them quit. He praised the U.K.’s evidence-based approach, which has significantly reduced smoking rates, but warned against recent proposals that could undermine these achievements.
Jones argued against banning disposable vapes and flavored products, explaining that such measures could drive consumers to the black market and hinder smoking cessation efforts.
Jones criticized the WHO for its opposition to RRPs, stating that its stance is not supported by scientific evidence. He called for greater accountability and transparency in international regulatory discussions, advocating for public and parliamentary scrutiny of decisions made by the FCTC.
Highlighting the importance of flavors in vaping products for adult smokers, Jones cited research showing that nontobacco flavors are popular across all age groups. He argued that banning these flavors would be counterproductive and could lead to increased smoking rates as consumers turn to unregulated alternatives.
Jones also addressed the potential of heat-not-burn products and nicotine pouches, urging the government to reconsider its stance on these alternatives and commission further research into their benefits. He emphasized that public health policies should provide smokers with accurate information about all nicotine products to support informed decision-making.
In conclusion, Jones called for a continued focus on tobacco harm reduction, advocating for evidence-based regulations that support smokers in their efforts to quit. He stressed the need for the U.K. to maintain its leadership in this area and to hold international organizations accountable for their policies and decisions.
Ramsey S. Lewis, Charles and Marilyn Stuber distinguished professor of plant breeding at North Carolina State University, delivered a detailed keynote on the complexities and challenges of developing low-nicotine tobacco varieties. He highlighted the increasing interest in these due to potential regulatory mandates that could require more than a 35-fold reduction in nicotine levels in conventional cigarettes. He emphasized that nicotine accumulation in tobacco plants results from complex interactions between environmental and genetic factors and asserted that genetic modification is the only viable method to achieve the stringent targets suggested by regulatory authorities.
Lewis outlined the significant difficulties in achieving lower nicotine levels without negatively impacting other critical aspects of tobacco cultivation. He noted that reducing nicotine content often leads to undesirable reductions in yield, increased production costs and severe effects on leaf quality and other chemical properties of the tobacco. He warned against underestimating the complexity of biochemical pathways in living organisms, explaining that modifications in one area can lead to unexpected consequences in another.
Furthermore, Lewis enumerated the numerous obstacles facing the development of low-nicotine tobacco. These include the feasibility of such projects, the limited availability of suitable varieties, susceptibility to diseases and insects, lower yields and higher production costs. Additionally, he highlighted the challenge of global acceptance of gene-editing techniques and the potential impact this may have on exports. Lewis underscored the need for extensive research and development to overcome these barriers and meet future regulatory requirements effectively.
Participants in the “Nicotine – An Agricultural Approach” panel provided a comprehensive overview of the agricultural challenges and considerations associated with nicotine regulation. The discussions emphasized the need for continued research and development, thoughtful regulatory approaches and the importance of supporting both farmers and consumers in navigating these changes.
Moderator Miranda Kinney, senior vice president of global communications and sustainability at Pyxus International, began the panel by delving into the agricultural aspects behind the tobacco products on today’s shelves, likening their personalized production journey to that of food products in supermarkets. She highlighted the importance of tobacco leaf, noting that it is the essential ingredient in most nicotine products and plays a critical role in supporting consumer satisfaction.
Kinney emphasized that the tobacco industry supports millions of jobs globally, from farmers and processors to manufacturers, exporters, distributors and retailers, thereby enhancing livelihoods and supporting the economic viability of many developing countries.
Kinney guided the discussion toward the intricate journey of the tobacco leaf, from the speck of a seed to a substantial industry contributor. She explained that the genetics and breeding of the seed, agricultural production practices, environmental factors and regulatory landscapes all impact the industry today and shape its future. She highlighted recent scientific advancements in genetics, cultivation practices and mechanization, noting their significant impact on farmers, particularly in developing countries where tobacco for novel nicotine products is often grown.
Addressing regulatory challenges, Kinney pointed out that regulations, such as those proposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on menthol and low-nicotine mandates, present key concerns for the industry. She discussed how potential regulations, particularly from influential regions like the EU and the U.S., could set trends globally. Kinney emphasized the importance of industry collaboration to anticipate and adapt to potential changes, ensuring that all parts of the supply chain are considered. She concluded by stressing the need for collective industry expertise to navigate the future, underlining that the agricultural aspects of tobacco production are intricately tied to the overall industry.
George Cassels-Smith, chief executive of Tobacco Technology Inc., addressed the potential complications of mixed-crop standards, where only some plants meet lower alkaloid levels. He questioned the practicality and extensive testing required to manage such standards, particularly for plants that do not meet the set criteria.
Cassels-Smith noted that synthetic nicotine gained a foothold in the U.S. market due to the stringent regulations on tobacco plants, although the regulations on synthetic nicotine have since been tightened. He pointed out that vaping products predominantly use synthetic nicotine, highlighting a significant shift in the industry toward these alternatives.
He underscored the need for clear and feasible regulatory frameworks that consider the practical implications for producers and the broader industry.
Lewis opened his remarks by clarifying that his expertise lies in plant breeding rather than addiction or behavior. He highlighted the significant challenges associated with modifying the nicotine content in tobacco plants without causing negative effects on the plants themselves.
Lewis pointed out that if a regulatory mandate for low-nicotine tobacco were imposed today, the industry would struggle to comply due to the limited availability of viable low-nicotine varieties, which currently number around five and are associated with lower yields.
He emphasized the complexity of biochemical pathways and the unintended consequences that can arise from genetic modifications, underscoring the need for extensive research and development to meet potential regulatory requirements.
Carlos Pulcinelli, global project manager at Alliance One International, elaborated on the critical role of alkaloids in plant metabolism, with nicotine being the most significant alkaloid in tobacco. He asserted that it is currently impossible to control or modulate nicotine expression through agronomic practices alone, necessitating substantial investment in research and development.
Pulcinelli stressed the increasing regulatory pressures facing the industry and the importance of developing the right plant varieties that meet the needs of farmers, regulators and consumers. He also highlighted environmental challenges such as extreme weather, droughts and floods, which complicate efforts to reduce nicotine levels.
Despite potential changes in product formulations, he argued that the importance of plant alkaloids would remain paramount, calling for a balanced approach to meet these diverse challenges.
Lea Scott, senior vice president of agronomy and agricultural sustainability for Universal Leaf Tobacco Co., discussed various agronomic practices, such as topping, used to manage alkaloid levels in tobacco plants. He emphasized the economic significance of tobacco farming, which generates approximately $944 million in revenue for the U.S. annually.
Scott raised concerns about whether low-nicotine mandates might inadvertently encourage the growth of illicit trade, which already accounts for around 11 percent of the global tobacco market. He highlighted the substantial improvements in technology and the development of disease-resistant, high-yielding plant varieties. However, Scott noted that the transition to RRPs, such as heat-not-burn tobacco, would impact farmers by requiring less raw tobacco.
He questioned whether lower nicotine levels might lead to increased consumption if consumers use more product to achieve their desired effect. Scott stressed that any shift to lower nicotine tobacco must be gradual and carefully managed, given its profound impact on farmers and communities worldwide. He also pointed out the trend of growing tobacco specifically for nicotine extraction into liquid forms, underscoring the importance of supporting both consumers and farmers.
David Newns, entrepreneur and investor, chairperson and co-founder of Plxsur, highlighted the transformative potential of RRPs in global health outcomes. He noted that RRPs have evolved from a virtually unknown category to one now embraced by mainstream populations. This shift presents a significant opportunity to improve health outcomes worldwide by reducing the risks associated with traditional smoking. Newns emphasized that innovation cycles have been instrumental in driving the growth of the RRP category, transitioning vaping from a niche product to a globally recognized tool for harm reduction.
Newns acknowledged the challenges associated with disposable vaping products but highlighted their crucial role in helping a large number of smokers switch to safer alternatives. These products have made it easier for smokers to incorporate vaping into their daily routines, facilitating a widespread transition from combustible tobacco. He also pointed out the collaborative efforts between academics and creatives in the vaping industry, dedicated to the mission of harm reduction. He reaffirmed that there is no one-size-fits-all solution, as different consumers have varying needs.
Focusing on these needs, Newns explained that the universal demand from RRPs is for “more”—more convenience, flexibility, flavor, nicotine and personalization. This desire for “more” drives the continuous innovation within the industry. Looking ahead to GTNF 2024 in Athens this September, Newns expressed his enthusiasm over participating in “The Big Pitch” panel, which will invite innovators to present new and exciting nicotine products to industry leaders, fostering dialogue and shaping the future of RRPs.
June 1, 2024
A Spark in the Dark

Photos courtesy of Mathijs Aliet
Not all is lost for brand owners operating in dark markets.
By Stefanie Rossel
In February, the Canadian Cancer Society released a report detailing the global progress on tobacco health warnings and plain packaging, which requires cigarette manufacturers to market their products in uniform, unattractively colored packs without brand imagery and print their brand names in generic fonts.
To date, 25 countries or territories have adopted standard packaging, the most recent ones being Myanmar, Oman and Georgia. A further 14 countries are preparing legislation, and three more have it “in practice,” meaning that they import cigarettes from a country with plain packaging requirements, as happens, for example, in Monaco, which buys its cigarettes from France. In addition, the report notes, the graphic health warnings mandated by some governments are so large that they resemble plain packaging. In nine countries, graphic health warnings account for at least 85 percent of the front and back side of the pack.
Recommended in the guidelines for implementation of Article 11of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), standardized packaging is viewed by its supporters as an efficient means to reduce the appeal of tobacco products and increase the effectiveness of health warnings. By removing the visual cues that prompt existing users to purchase the product and by preventing new customers from developing brand loyalty, proponents argue, plain packaging ultimately leads to better public health.
Plain packaging is also a comparatively inexpensive intervention that can be implemented more easily than other FCTC measures, such as establishing a national tobacco cessation system. But despite abundant research since standardized packaging made its global debut in Australia in December 2012, there is still no reliable evidence that the measure achieves its objectives, as studies remain inconclusive or even contradictory. Opponents claim that the removal of branding has merely led to commoditization, causing well-established brands to lose market share to cheaper alternatives.
The Power of Word of Mouth
Mathijs Aliet
For tobacco companies, marketing products in such “dark” markets is a challenge, even more so because most of the countries that require plain packaging also ban tobacco advertising and product displays at the point of sale (POS).
A 2023 report by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission underlines the importance of the POS for the industry. In 2022, U.S. tobacco manufacturers spent more than $8.3 billion promoting cigarettes and smokeless tobacco at the POS, accounting for over 97 percent of their total marketing expenditure for those product categories.
Yet, despite the loss of conventional marketing instruments, dark markets are not lost for brand owners, according to Mathijs Aliet, founder of Square44, a brand design agency based in Bangkok. “Consumers decide if they want a product or not,” he says. “There are still needs that are fulfilled, and word of mouth is a big thing. Regulations will not stop people from talking to each other, comparing experiences and making recommendations.”
Consumers also play an essential role during the launch of new brands in dark markets, when there is zero association in the buyer’s mind. “In markets that are extremely dark, it’s often people watching people that triggers new trends,” Aliet explains. “People that meet friends that have a new product are seen as trendsetters—this is something that is hard to stop.”
Square44 operates in 20 different markets across Asia, the Middle East and North Africa and has worked for tobacco companies such as Philip Morris International, BAT and Japan Tobacco International. Due to the widespread restrictions on cigarette branding, however, tobacco jobs are “rare and few,” according to Aliet. In dark markets, Square44 has profound experience working for manufacturers of alcoholic beverages in Thailand, Myanmar, Nepal and Indonesia.
“Many markets have individual rules, and most face dark market challenges in various degrees,” says Aliet. “Brand support extends into different spaces—the smoke zones at airports, brand environment design, creating bespoke structural solutions or working on new product development concepts for test are areas where we support tobacco clients. Building connections to the trade or retail channels as well is an opportunity where still quite a bit of activity takes place, such as dealer events, partner get-togethers, etc. This is an example of spending the marketing budget in dark markets in the right way with entertaining, training and incentives to make them sell your brands.”
Generally, Aliet advises his clients to be proactive. Manufacturers who anticipate change can build a loyal following for their brands before any restrictions take effect.

Plain packaging is a comparatively inexpensive intervention—for governments anyway—that can be implemented more easily than other FCTC measures.
Innovation Is Key
Another strategy to sustain brand awareness is developing surrogate brands in an unrelated, nonrestricted category, according to Square44. “Back in the days in Europe, the Camel brand invented outdoor clothing to keep their brand alive beyond cigarettes,” says Aliet. “This was at that point a clever way out. The brands that survive are the ones that pay extra attention to channels or touchpoints where they are still allowed to connect.”
Surrogate brands also help with events, according to Aliet. “You can get the brand out and organize something around a smoke-infused snack or beverage that happens to carry the same name,” he says. “B2B events are largely unregulated and an important influential factor for most manufacturers that play an important word-of-mouth role. Building solutions that drive value, solve problems or address needs there are will always result in success.”
Generally, brands that survive in dark markets establish their unique identifying brand assets and elements well, observes Aliet. “Use that across touchpoints in 2D graphics, even 3D environments. Colors, shapes—anything where we don’t show brand but queue recognition is what comes to mind.”
Social media can play a role too. “Depending on the location of platform, a manufacturer might not be able or allowed to localize messaging, but we see user-generated content pick up big time, especially on social selling channels,” says Aliet. “We’re luckily not that far yet that governments are telling platforms to ban images of consumers smoking or using product. Using influencers is getting heavily restricted market by market.”
Self-regulation and brand innovation are other vital, Aliet points out. “There’s no doubt that brands should pivot,” he says. “Governments are making legislation tougher, and certain categories will most likely not survive. We see this in the energy space as well, where fossil fuels are facing a lot of negative press. The smart companies pivot and innovate beyond category—cannabis, vaping, liquid drinks—as people are still looking to fulfill a need. Brands can reinvent themselves around needs with newer solutions that appeal to a clean, next-gen lifestyle. That’s what brands must do regardless—innovate around market movements and changes in consumer preference.”
A Different POS
Depending on the degree of restrictions, the point of sale may turn from a place of communication and product variety into a wasted space. In Australia, for example, customers who want to buy cigarettes must ask the store clerk. There are no signs directing smokers to the POS, according to Christoph Moser, managing director of POS Tuning, a German company that offers POS shelf and storage solutions to customers worldwide.
According to Moser, priorities are different at a dark market POS. “In classic dark markets, product availability is getting ever more important. Shelves are equipped with sliding doors or flaps, and the opening time is limited. There is a defined time slot during which presentation and removal of a pack takes place, which makes it more important that the merchandise can be seen immediately at the time of opening. Push-feed systems are therefore essential, as they facilitate access for the salesperson.”
His company offers mechanical as well as digital systems that allow customers to take stock immediately. “This works with an indicator for the inventory or with a digital push-feed system that records inventory levels in real time and signals when stocks are too low or if there is an out-of-shelf [situation],” he says.
In many dark markets, the placement of tobacco products has changed. Instead of being displayed on the back wall of the store, as is often the case in less restrictive markets, cigarettes are placed under the counter, where they are invisible to customers. “Sixty percent of sales at petrol stations are generated with tobacco products,” explains Moser. “If displaying the products is banned or restricted, it has consequences. POS Tuning has developed specific push-feed solutions to place the vast variety of tobacco products that are usually stored in the back wall in the limited space of a counter. These solutions allow for placement of several brands in one row behind one another, meaning the same amount of product can be placed on a significantly smaller surface.”
Moser observes that many retailers in countries changing to a dark market try to put off the transition as long as possible—and are thus insufficiently prepared. “Fast and efficient solutions are required that enable the covered presentation of goods in existing shelves. We offer various retrofit kits for this,” he says.
Just like the appearance of the POS, the attitude of consumers in dark markets has changed, notes Moser: “Customers get used to this kind of [product] presentation,” he says. “In most cases, it’s a planned purchase, which means customers prefer a certain brand, which they then buy, thereby accepting other pack sizes.”
Stefanie Rossel is Tobacco Reporter’s editorial contributor. An experienced trade journalist, she combines sharp reporting skills with in-depth knowledge of the tobacco and vapor industries. Prior to joining Tobacco Reporter, Stefanie was editor-in-chief at Tobacco Journal International, where she worked for a decade. Fluent in English, German and French, Stefanie covers tobacco news around the world. She is based in Germany.

June 1, 2024
Controlled Kick

TJP Lab’s oral nicotine factory in Pickering, Ontario, features high-speed pouch filling equipment and sophisticated technology to ensure consumer safety and product efficacy.
TJP Labs’ novel nicotine particulate significantly speeds up nicotine delivery.
By Stefanie Rossel
David Richmond-Peck | Photos: TJP Labs
More than two decades after the debut of the first commercial e-cigarettes, delivering consumers the right degree of nicotine—the “perfect kick”—remains a challenge for manufacturers of reduced-risk products.
To solve this issue, Canada-based TJP Labs has developed a novel nicotine particulate, for which it filed for patent protection in April 2024. The new technology dramatically increases the speed of nicotine release compared to polacrilex, a resin complex commonly used in nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT) products, and other forms of nicotine that presently exist in recreational products, according to David Richmond-Peck, chief relationship officer at TJP Labs.
“Our technology allows for control and extreme flexibility in terms of the finished product’s nicotine release profile,” he says. “It is quite versatile and can be used with different forms of nicotine—whether it’s tobacco-derived, synthetic, a prodrug or an analog. This inclusivity helps with its applicability across a wide range of products. Quite notably, the development can aid in addressing concerns with tobacco-specific nitrosamines, which are minimal or absent, especially in synthetic forms. Further, our innovative development has the potential to provide an enhanced consumer experience by providing a faster and more efficient nicotine release, aiming to provide a more satisfying and potentially safer alternative.”
According to TJP Labs, the nicotine particulate offers versatile particulate size customization, ranging from ultra-fine to several hundred microns, for precise product design as well as precision-targeted binding. “When utilized in combination with other features, our technology allows us specific customization capability to tailor products for faster or more controlled release, addressing various consumer needs and improving efficacy. Such control can lead to cost-effective production and better overall product performance, enhancing the success rates of smoking cessation efforts or providing more enjoyable recreational options.”
The product can also be used with a broad spectrum of core materials, including porous or nonporous, biodegradable and various organic compounds, notes Richmond-Peck. This enhances the company’s ability to innovate and tailor nicotine-delivery products. “This versatility means products can be designed to mimic the nicotine uptake of combustible tobacco more closely, potentially improving their effectiveness as smoking cessation aids or recreational alternatives,” he says. “The flexibility in core material choice allows for innovations that can help to meet diverse consumer preferences and regulatory requirements.”
The particulate can be utilized in both NRT products and recreational nicotine products. “This includes applications in gums, patches and lozenges, especially in modern oral nicotine pouches, where controlled nicotine release is crucial,” says Richmond-Peck. “Our technology is designed to enhance both the efficacy and consumer satisfaction of these products, making them viable alternatives to traditional smoking products.”
Pouches with Potential
Other advantages include efficient raw material use, allowing for nicotine loading several orders of magnitude over polacrilex, and optimization for organic and inorganic forms, including biodegradable resins, according to TJP Labs. The technology is designed for seamless integration, enabling easy incorporation into nicotine pouch formats and related products.
A wholly owned subsidiary of Kik Ass Products, TJP Labs is a full-service, global contract manufacturer of next-generation products, specializing in modern oral buccal delivery pouch manufacturing. It is also a newcomer to the industry. In 2021, it began developing innovative pouched products for energy and nutraceutical uses. In September that year, it opened Canada’s first modern oral nicotine contract manufacturing facility for oral nicotine pouches in Pickering, Ontario. Spread over a rapidly expanding campus, the plant features high-speed pouch filling, in-line photography, check weighers and integrated finished product metal detectors to ensure high standards of consumer safety and product efficacy.
“We are currently expanding our production capabilities, aiming to achieve an impressive output of over 100 million retail units annually by mid-2025,” says Richmond-Peck. “As market dynamics evolve, we plan to double this capacity to 200 million retail units by 2026. Our operations extend beyond manufacturing to include robust research and development efforts, all driven by our commitment to advancing harm reduction.”
In addition to contract manufacturing for international brands, TJP Labs has also launched its own brand, L!X nicotine pouches, which was first marketed by its subsidiary L!X Innovations. In early 2022, TJP submitted a premarket tobacco product application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for L!X nicotine pouches.
In June 2023, Imperial Brands acquired 14 L!X pouch variants for an initial consideration of £65 million ($81.57 million) and an additional deferred sum based on sales volumes over five years. The deal is meant to enable Imperial’s U.S. operation, ITG Brands, to expand its next-generation product offerings in the United States. Following further consumer testing, ITG Brands launched the range in the U.S. under the brand name Zone in the first quarter of 2024, with TJP Labs continuing to manufacture the pouches under contract.
“Our primary focus in the nicotine industry has consistently been on harm reduction,” says Richmond-Peck. “Although we started as a manufacturing company, we have broadened our capabilities to include research and development. In 2023, we facilitated Imperial Brands’ entry into the U.S. market by selling them our range of nicotine pouch products and serving as their contract manufacturer. We retained the global rights to our L!X pouches outside the U.S. and are actively seeking market opportunities and partnerships in additional territories. Currently, our development efforts are concentrated on providing consumers with innovative pouched products that incorporate energy and other nutraceutical ingredients.”
To TJP Labs, modern oral pouches are an innovative delivery system with the potential to deliver various active ingredients, with applications ranging from pharmaceutical to recreational use. “In 2021, we began to develop a separate category of energy products for adult consumers. These products are now market-ready and slated to launch later this year,” says Richmond-Peck.
For its new nicotine particulate, TJP Labs anticipates to receive initial evaluation data by the end of the second quarter this year. Next steps will involve exploring partnerships or licensing opportunities to leverage the technology effectively for harm reduction, according to Richmond-Peck. “Depending on the product application, regulatory approvals will be necessary, such as certifications from medical agencies for NRT products or FDA approval for recreational nicotine products in the U.S. Our objective will be to sell or license the intellectual property to the party that can most effectively contribute to global harm reduction.”
Stefanie Rossel is Tobacco Reporter’s editorial contributor. An experienced trade journalist, she combines sharp reporting skills with in-depth knowledge of the tobacco and vapor industries. Prior to joining Tobacco Reporter, Stefanie was editor-in-chief at Tobacco Journal International, where she worked for a decade. Fluent in English, German and French, Stefanie covers tobacco news around the world. She is based in Germany.

June 1, 2024
The Forgotten Frontier

Photo: fontriel
Is tobacco harm reduction reaching the Global South?
By Pieter Vorster and Sudhanshu Patwardhan
Eighty percent of the current users of risky tobacco products live in the “Global South,” the geopolitical clubbing of low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) that includes not only Southern Hemisphere nations such as Fiji but also nations that are firmly in the Northern Hemisphere, geographically, like China, India, Russia and Bhutan, along with countries that straddle both segments, such as Uganda.
A world free of smoked and smokeless forms of risky tobacco products such as cigarettes, bidis, gutkha, mishri, zarda and toombak can prevent a billion premature deaths this century. This can potentially reduce the social, economic and health inequity within and between countries, thus delivering on many U.N. Sustainable Development Goals and taking a step closer to the World Health Organization’s “health for all” ambition. Do manufacturers of tobacco products, as well as businesses delivering cessation products and services, have a role in this?
Sudhanshu Patwardhan is a medical doctor, nicotine expert and health tech entrepreneur. Pieter Vorster is managing director of Idwala Research, a consultancy aiming to accelerate global tobacco transformation and harm reduction. Both have roots in the Global South and are motivated by the goal of reducing the harms from tobacco, as seen in the Global North. Below, they discuss the challenges and opportunities related to global health equity in a freewheeling dialogue, interchangeably playing the role of interviewer, respondent, expert and devil’s advocate.
Background
In June 2023, at the Global Forum on Nicotine in Warsaw, Sudhanshu Patwardhan convened and chaired a workshop of international experts representing diverse stakeholder groups—tobacco control, industry and management consulting. The session was titled “Tobacco Industry Transformation—Is It Really Reaching LMICs?” The panel and the audience, including Pieter Vorster, brought deep and wide expertise in public health, consumer advocacy, regulatory affairs, nicotine supply chains and capital markets. As the first anniversary of the session approaches, it is timely to discuss the developments that have occurred since and what needs to be done going forward to achieve a world free from risky tobacco products.
Pieter Vorster: Sud, let us summarize the session before we leap forward into what has happened since and what is next. So, in the workshop, you brought up the role of a range of stakeholders in the ecosystem: regulators, industry, consumers and healthcare professionals, to name a few. What are the regulatory challenges in the Global South that significantly impact tobacco cessation and prevention of initiation?
Sudhanshu Patwardhan: Pieter, smoked and smokeless forms of risky tobacco products are a leading cause of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) globally and increasingly in the Global South. However, when it comes to tobacco control, there is a serious regulatory capacity gap in the Global South. Most of these countries are still developing locally relevant systems and policies that can best meet their populations’ needs for healthier, happier and longer lives. All these countries are going through a dramatic epidemiological shift—with NCDs overtaking infectious diseases as a leading cause of disease and death. Most of these countries are signatories to the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control [FCTC], but the implementation of the FCTC articles is still very selective. For example, most emphasis is on taxation (a proven tool for reducing demand and increasing treasury earnings), advertising restrictions, and campaigns for public awareness and prevention of initiation. Although this is having an impact, progress has been slow. The principle of harm reduction, although explicitly stated as a component of tobacco control in Article 1(d) of the FCTC, has largely been ignored by the WHO to the extent that its guidance on tobacco policy favors a prohibitionist approach toward safer nicotine alternatives and that is being adopted by many countries in the Global South that look to the WHO for leadership on health policy.
Vorster: Please explain how that is also a regulatory issue.
Patwardhan: This came up during our workshop. The tobacco industry is innovating into “reduced-risk products” at a breakneck speed, catching up with product innovation from outside the industry (e.g., e-cigarettes) or launching products they have developed through years of R&D (e.g., nicotine pouches and heated-but-not-burned tobacco products). Their ability to launch these products is stymied by local prohibitions in many countries globally. If regulated strictly enough and marketed only to current tobacco users, these products have the potential to reduce tobacco-related harms significantly. Evidence from the U.K., Japan and Sweden is a case in point.
In an interlinked issue, there is hardly any capacity built for tobacco cessation in the Global South. Most of the pharmaceutical industry or health tech entrepreneurs there are equally unenthused about innovation into tobacco cessation and the massive public health opportunity. They fail to recognize the financial dividend by serving the “base of the pyramid.” So, effectively, nearly a billion people in the Global South—current tobacco users—are consigned to struggle by themselves in their attempts to quit, and most fail.
An important aspect of “demand reduction” in tobacco control, i.e., enabling access to appealing nicotine-replacement products that can enable and sustain cessation among current adult tobacco users, is therefore not available in most of the Global South.
Vorster: So, bans on newer “safer” nicotine alternatives in many countries are causing a strange situation: Risky forms of tobacco are still available everywhere, legally, while reduced-risk products are not? One would have thought that the science underpinning the tobacco harm reduction principle is universal. If it is clearly understood by U.K. policymakers and enshrined in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s “modified-risk tobacco product” authorization, why is it not accepted in the Global South?
Patwardhan: It is important to bear in mind that sound policymaking and regulations cannot be a simple copy-paste from the Global North. Yes, global good practices can be adapted—but there is no substitute for local science to ensure relevance and sustainability. Local research capacity not only helps build the scientific evidence base but also helps society interpret it objectively. That is currently missing in most of the Global South. A glaring example is from my recent attendance at the biannual global meeting of the Society for Research in Nicotine and Tobacco, held in Edinburgh. Out of the over 1,000 delegates there, in my estimation, less than 5 percent of those attending were working on the ground in tobacco cessation and harm reduction in the Global South. The fact that these conferences happen mainly in Europe and the USA also points to systemic bias in funding and research, all skewed to the affluent Western nations. Even conventional tobacco cessation treatments are hardly, if at all, studied and available in the Global South.
Vorster: Do you mean nicotine-replacement therapy products (NRT)?
Patwardhan: Yes, that’s a good example. NRT are on the model essential medicines list of the WHO for tobacco dependence treatment. They have also made it to the National Essential Medicines lists of member countries. But the reality on the ground is vastly different and quite frustrating. Little or no local research data on the use of NRT for tobacco dependence treatment exist in most of the Global South. NRT gums, patches and lozenges are much costlier than the tobacco products they are meant to replace during a quit attempt. They are either available at limited points of sale or not at all, and healthcare practitioners are not equipped to advise patients on using these products.
Vorster: You often talk about nicotine misperceptions among healthcare professionals, and you led the first published research study on this topic in 2013. More recently, the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World-funded SERMO study of over 15,000 doctors from 11 countries also showed that of those interviewed, over 70 percent believed (wrongly) that nicotine in tobacco products causes cancer. How does that impact cessation?
Patwardhan: From personal experience interacting with numerous frontline clinicians worldwide over the years, I can see how nicotine misperceptions influence their advice to tobacco-user patients. Smoked tobacco and most smokeless tobacco products are harmful due to a wide range of chemicals, including carcinogens, either produced during combustion or added during manufacturing. Nicotine is not a carcinogen; it is, however, the dependence-causing chemical in tobacco products for sure! The misperception about nicotine regarding cancer is a likely cause of hesitance among clinicians to recommend adequate NRT treatment for long enough, alongside behavioral counseling. Cravings for nicotine and withdrawal symptoms can last from weeks to months. Not supporting the quit attempt with adequate dosing of clean forms of nicotine (e.g., NRT) for long enough is very likely to lead to a failed quit attempt or relapse. Countries such as the U.K. have strong regulatory expertise in tobacco control and expertise in nicotine science and have therefore embraced a tobacco harm reduction indication for NRT—i.e., deemed it safer for smokers to consume NRT as long as necessary, for quitting smoking altogether and to prevent relapse.
Vorster: You make the role of regulators in tobacco cessation loud and clear. What about the industry?
Patwardhan: The industry is not a monolith. Nor is it just the tobacco industry we are talking about here. The nicotine supply chain has never been so exciting! A significant proportion of the world’s pharmaceutical-grade nicotine comes from companies extracting nicotine from tobacco in India. Many of those companies also supply the increasing demand for nicotine for e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches. Then there is synthetic nicotine, made to pharmaceutical standards, also poised to disrupt the supply chain and potentially free up thousands of hectares of arable land to address food security issues. Some of the large multinational tobacco companies have invested in medically licensed NRT, e.g., BAT and Philip Morris International, blurring the lines between tobacco and NRT companies, potentially expanding the choices available for enabling quit attempts among current tobacco users. However, given the history of the industry, any efforts by the tobacco industry to conduct tobacco cessation training among healthcare professionals would be viewed with suspicion and likely to evoke a reaction from those in public health. There is a clear role and an unmet need for independent organizations to take the lead on this in the interest of public health. Tobacco companies can better focus their resources on conducting locally relevant tobacco cessation and harm reduction research in the Global South. That could potentially better inform regulation and an understanding of harm reduction principles among key stakeholders.
Now, this is where I get to ask you questions! Given your deep expertise in the tobacco industry transformation process, what do you make of the tobacco companies’ innovation and launches in the context of the Global South?
Vorster: Although there have been valuable attempts to gauge overall industry transformation, notably the Tobacco Transformation Index, no independent research has been conducted that tracks transformation progress specifically in the Global South.
Having said that, there have been encouraging, albeit nascent, trends here. During the early years of reduced-risk tobacco product (RRP) launches, multinational tobacco companies focused on countries such as the U.S., Japan, Korea and Europe. More recently, companies like BAT have launched nicotine pouches in Kenya, Pakistan and South Africa and PMI in the Philippines, Pakistan and South Africa. Furthermore, PMI sells heated-tobacco products in a considerable number of Global South markets, including Indonesia in select cities, while BAT has a significant geographical footprint there with vaping products.
Apart from regulatory measures that prohibit the sale of RRPs in a substantial proportion of these countries, one of the most significant barriers to harm reduction is the cost of these products relative to cigarettes, which is a function of both low cigarette prices and excise tax and relatively high production costs for RRPs. For example, the PKR120 ($0.43) per can, at which BAT and PMI sell nicotine pouches in Pakistan to compete with low-end cigarette prices, is below current production costs of about $0.50 to $0.60 per can. For RRPs to make meaningful inroads in the Global South, it is imperative that costs are reduced significantly and the price differential with all forms of risky tobacco products available locally is decreased substantially. Within this context, it is significant that BAT (followed by PMI) chose to introduce nicotine pouches in Pakistan, which has the second-highest incidence of smokeless tobacco use in the world.
Patwardhan: Where do large national tobacco companies come into this?
Vorster: The transformation picture is markedly different beyond the listed multinational tobacco companies. Sadly, this is also where the majority of the world’s consumers of harmful tobacco products resides.
There exists clear potential for conflicts of interest where state monopolies control the tobacco industry, but these potential conflicts exist well beyond state ownership of tobacco companies through the tax revenues earned from tobacco products. For countries with a significant reliance on tobacco tax revenues, the WHO’s prohibitionist stance on nicotine consumer products has helped justify the banning of less risky forms of tobacco and nicotine.
In China, the government receives the equivalent of circa 10 percent of General Government Final Consumption Expenditure from tobacco taxes in addition to the substantial revenue it earns from its ownership of the CNTC [China National Tobacco Corp.]. It was, perhaps, no surprise that, in 2022, the burgeoning independent Chinese vape industry was brought under the purview of the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration, leading to its near collapse owing to significant regulatory restraints.
Indonesia is the second-largest cigarette market in the world after China, and whilst the tobacco industry is privately owned, the government receives some 13 percent of General Government Final Consumption Expenditure from tobacco taxes. RRPs are not banned in Indonesia, but with average cigarette prices around $1.50 per pack, they are not competitive and will likely only appeal to high-end consumers.
Patwardhan: From the looks of it, the odds are stacked against tobacco users in the Global South: knee-jerk regulation against safer nicotine products, a local versus multinational tobacco companies’ turf war, nicotine misperceptions among healthcare professionals and a lack of locally conducted scientific research in tobacco control and harm reduction. Conducting high-quality, independent research in tobacco control and harm reduction, which can be peer-reviewed and used to inform regulatory and clinical decisions, can change this situation for the better.
Vorster: Furthermore, despite initiatives such as the Tobacco Transformation Index that assess the overall shift in the industry, a considerable gap persists in independent research focused on monitoring transformation progress specifically in the Global South.
Patwardhan: Agreed. There is an urgent need for industry transformation, not just in products but also in organizational attitudes toward public health, research and social responsibility in the Global South. It is quite clear to me that the industry must prioritize public health outcomes alongside business interests. It was mentioned in our panel how crucial it is for companies to engage with communities transparently to foster an environment conducive to harm reduction. This includes investing in local communities, conducting local research to global standards and responsibly supporting educational campaigns that accurately inform adult consumers about the risks of consuming tobacco and the evidence-based aids available locally for quitting tobacco use.
Conclusion
Eliminating harm from tobacco products is a lofty social, public health, economic and political goal. It needs to be a global goal too. The rapid pace of innovation into safer nicotine alternatives for tobacco cessation is likely to be available and affordable only to the adult tobacco consumers in wealthier “Global North” nations in a well-regulated environment, and this threatens to worsen the inequity already imposed on current tobacco users of the Global South. The industries—not just tobacco but also pharmaceutical as well as new disruptive digital and health tech companies, have much to gain commercially by innovating in the Global South. There are nearly a billion current adult tobacco consumers there waiting for just that!
Pieter Vorster is managing director of Idwala Research, a consultancy aiming to accelerate global tobacco transformation and harm reduction.

Sudhanshu Patwardhan is a medical doctor, nicotine expert and health tech entrepreneur from India, based in the U.K. He works on projects around the world to reduce harm from tobacco, especially among the most disadvantaged tobacco user populations.

June 1, 2024