Category: Press Releases

The UK nicotine pouch market has evolved from a marginal phenomenon into a rapidly growing and increasingly important segment of the smoke-free nicotine category. For retailers, this means a need to respond to a wholesale shift in consumer purchasing habits. Keeping up with demand is important, but for this category, simply stocking the products is not enough. The staff selling the products must also have a sound level of understanding to meet customer expectations and help them make informed purchasing decisions. 

Here, Markus Lindblad, from Northerner, shares the essential guide to selling nicotine pouches and what every retailer should know. 

What are customers looking for when it comes to nicotine pouches?

For UK customers, there are three key factors to consider. Price, flavour, and nicotine strength. As the market matures, we could expect to see factors such as moisture level and pouch size become more important to consumers, but at the moment, it’s the three fundamentals of price, flavours and strength that consumers are focused on. 

For retailers, this means the priority is less on stocking a wide variety of different brand names, and more about having a good range of flavours and different nicotine strengths. If you can keep a good range of flavour and strength options for the customer, and keep stock up to date with innovative new products, then you’re already ahead. 

Flavours and Strength – where to start?

Nicotine pouches come in an increasingly wide variety of flavours, however, the traditional core flavours remain the most popular. Mint is by far the most popular flavour in the UK, found in six out of ten cans sold (59%). Fruit flavours come in second place, making up 22% of cans sold, followed by citrus at 8%.

There is a wide range of strengths available, and we would recommend stocking everything from normal strength, which is 1.5–6 mg per pouch, up to extra strong, which ranges from 9.1–20 mg per pouch. The British Standards Institute recommends a maximum level of 20mg of nicotine per pouch, and reputable retailers should stay below this threshold. 

What knowledge should staff be equipped with when it comes to talking to customers about nicotine pouches? 

It’s really important that staff know how to guide customers on using the products correctly, explain to the customer how to select an appropriate strength level, and to give them some idea of what to expect from the experience. Most pouch users will be former or current smokers, so first find out about their current nicotine consumption habits, and help them to make informed choices about the strength that might work for them. 

For someone trying a pouch for the first time, the experience may not be as expected, particularly if they have opted for a stronger variety. Generally, anything over 20g of nicotine is too strong for most users, and not something we would advise stocking.

How do I explain the difference between snus and nicotine pouches?

In the UK, the product is often confused with traditional Swedish snus, which contains tobacco, and ‘snus’ has become a common way of describing nicotine pouches amongst consumers. However, traditional Swedish snus is illegal in the UK. It’s important to help customers understand the distinction between tobacco-containing snus and non-tobacco containing nicotine pouches.

How should I advise customers when it comes to brand recommendations?

The UK pouch market is not yet mature, and so there is very little brand loyalty. UK consumers are open to trying different brands and formats of pouches. Just over a third (34%) stick consistently with the same product, while 66% rotate between two or more different products. For six in ten pouch users (59%), it’s actually price that is the main motivation to switch products. Value is king for the UK pouch consumer, so if you have any offers or deals, make sure to shout about this!

PRESS RELEASE

The company’s U.S. return is anchored by its new headquarters and distribution center in Little Havana

Little Havana, Miami, FL — November 12, 2025 — After years of remarkable success in Europe and Asia, Duran Cigars proudly announces its return to the U.S. market. The company’s renewed presence marks the beginning of a new era for the family-owned brand, led by industry veteran Roberto Pelayo Duran and strengthened by the addition of his son, Roberto Pelayo Duran Jr.

Founded in 2013, Roberto Duran Premium Cigars made its debut at the IPCPR Trade Show in Las Vegas, introducing a portfolio that embodied the best of Cuban heritage and modern craftsmanship. Following a strong reception in the United States, Roberto Duran made the strategic decision to concentrate on the company’s global expansion—developing a 100-hectare farm in Quevedo, Ecuador, expanding the factory in Estelí, Nicaragua, and establishing a strong footprint across Europe and the Asian market. While his focus abroad allowed the company to grow its reputation for quality and consistency, it also set the stage for this year’s highly anticipated comeback to the U.S.

“Concentrating on our farm and global markets allowed us to perfect our production and strengthen our foundation,” said Roberto Pelayo Duran, Founder and CEO. “Now, with my son joining the business, we have the right team and structure in place to reestablish our presence in the United States while continuing to grow internationally.”

The company’s U.S. return is anchored by its new headquarters and distribution center in Little Havana (3141 SW 8th Street, Miami)—a location that doubles as a retail cigar shop and lounge. The new space serves as the brand’s American home base, connecting its global operations to the heart of Miami’s cigar culture.

Fueling this expansion is Roberto Pelayo Duran Jr., who joins as Marketing and Sales Manager. A graduate of the University of British Columbia (B.A. Political Science) and University of Notre Dame (M.S. Business Management), Duran Jr. brings a fresh, globally minded perspective to the family enterprise. His hands-on experience in Estelí and Quevedo—from fermentation and leaf selection to cigar rolling—has shaped a deep understanding of the craft and the people behind it.

“Working alongside my father has shown me how passion and precision come together to create something lasting,” said Duran Jr. “With our vertically integrated structure and our new Miami headquarters, we’re ready to share Duran Cigars with U.S. retailers and enthusiasts once again.”

With the addition of Roberto Jr. and its expanded infrastructure, Duran Cigars is poised for a powerful U.S. comeback—one built on family legacy, craftsmanship, and global success.

About Duran Cigars

Roberto Pelayo Duran began his lifelong journey in his native Havana, Cuba—where tobacco captured his passion and never let go. His early years overseeing cigar production in Cuba set the foundation for a career defined by craftsmanship and precision. He later advanced to manage the distribution of all Cuban cigar brands throughout Asia and Canada with The Pacific Cigar Company Ltd., further deepening his global expertise. His tenure with British American Tobacco expanded his experience to Middle East, Africa and the Americas. The creation of Duran Cigars gave Roberto the platform to craft and distribute cigars that embody the same excellence, construction, and character he demanded from the world’s finest. Today, Duran Cigars proudly represents a portfolio that includes Roberto Duran, Azan, Neya, Baracoa and Nicatabaco, each reflecting authentic heritage, meticulous blending, and the artistry that defines the Duran name.

By Dr. Arifin Fii, President, Advanced Centre for Addiction Treatment Advocacy (ACATA)

Malaysia has long aspired to become a smoke-free nation. Yet despite years of health laws and taxation regimes, one in five Malaysian adults still smoke today – that’s around 4 million adults.[i]

Smoking is increasingly viewed as a public health issue. The shift to vaping is seen as both a challenge and an opportunity for harm reduction, though regulation remains fragmented across states. However, Western public policy and proven results are often ignored.

Europe’s Alternative Nicotine to Cut Smoking Rates

Smoke-Free Sweden 2024: Missing the Target[ii] reports the European Union (EU) nations face a similar challenge. 24% of EU adults still smoke, a decline of just 1% since 2020, despite decades of strict laws and high taxes.

Ireland’s smoking rate is 18% against their 5% by 2025 goal, despite ban on disposable vapes and newly introduced highest in EU vape tax. The Netherlands smoking rate stands at 19%, only a 1% drop since 2020, despite restricting e-cigarette sales to specialist shops. Denmark’s regulation on alternative nicotine has stalled momentum altogether.

Sweden adopted a tobacco harm reduction (THR) strategy by utilizing non-combusted nicotine products nearly achieved smoke-free status (smoking rate between 5.6%–8%) and is expected to reach its 2025 target ahead of schedule. By recognizing proven results in alternative nicotine products, Sweden proved THR can bring real results.

Together, these examples underline one truth: Prohibition Does Not Work. When governments restrict less harmful alternatives, smokers are more likely to stick with cigarettes, delaying progress toward a smoke-free future.

The science behind THR is compelling. The Royal College of Physicians in the United Kingdom has found that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking[iii]. The real danger from tobacco is not the nicotine itself, but the thousands of toxic chemicals released when it is burned. While long-term data on vaping continues to evolve, the current evidence consistently shows it to be far less harmful, and many smokers use it as a transition tools.

Nicotine addiction, as any clinician knows, is not a moral failing but a medical condition that requires compassion and treatment. Many smokers genuinely want to quit but struggle with withdrawal and limited cessation tools. THR provides a pragmatic middle ground, helping smokers move away from the most harmful form of nicotine consumption without punishment or stigma.

Malaysia’s Enigma

Malaysia’s Ministry of Health recognizes that smoking leads to more than 27,000 preventable deaths every year.[iv] Smoking-related illnesses cost the nation billions of ringgits in healthcare spending annually. Despite these staggering numbers, our policy landscape remains uncertain. More alarmingly, it does not distinct the notable difference between carcinogen-induced diseases from cigarette smoking versus vape or e-cigarettes.

Malaysia missed an opportunity to really nip the problem in the bud when the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 took effect about 1-year ago. Harm reduction is not recognised as part of our national tobacco control strategy. Current measures treat all nicotine products as equally harmful, overlooking the opportunity to reduce smoking through less harmful, regulated, nicotine alternatives.

As discussions on whether to impose stricter measures or even a total vape ban continues, we must shift the conversation from viewing vape as a problem to seeing it as a potential public health tool with stricter enforcement for underage access. To do this responsibly will require commitment from all stakeholders: through education, enforcement and regulations that ensures safety while supporting smokers who want to quit.

Learning from Proven Strategies

Sweden’s success offers valuable lessons. Instead of treating all nicotine products as equally harmful, the government adopted a risk-proportionate regulatory approach, giving smokers less harmful, affordable and accessible options. This principle could guide Malaysia’s next step. By creating a clear framework for less harmful alternatives, we can reduce smoking prevalence.

The United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS) has incorporated e-cigarettes into its smoking cessation framework, and New Zealand’s regulatory action plan balances access to vaping products with youth protection measures.

Harm reduction is not a new concept in healthcare. It saves lives by meeting people where they are, not where we wish them to be. The same principle should guide tobacco control: helping smokers transition, not punishing them for struggling.

Sweden’s journey proves that a smoke-free future does not require eliminating nicotine altogether, only eliminating the harm that comes from burning it. By giving smokers choices rooted in science and compassion, the country reached its goal years ahead of schedule and improved public health outcomes nationwide. Malaysia can do the same, but it will take courage from policymakers, support from health advocates and trust in the evidence.

[i] National Health and Morbidity Survey (NHMS) 2023

[ii] Smoke-Free Sweden 2024: Missing the Target

[iii] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/e-cigarettes-around-95-less-harmful-than-tobacco-estimates-landmark-review

[iv] Institute for Public Health (IPH) Malaysia, Tobacco and E-Cigarette Survey 2023

PRESS RELEASE

Public backs tighter regulation of nicotine pouches as government reviews public health policies 

A new survey by Northerner on the public’s attitudes to changing public health policies has revealed that the British public overwhelmingly supports the regulation of nicotine pouches and stronger protections for young people. As the government moves to introduce new laws on tobacco and nicotine through the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, the survey results show that the vast majority of respondents support the introduction of regulation on nicotine pouches to ensure responsible use and consumer safety.

According to the survey, 84% of respondents agreed that the government should introduce new regulations for nicotine pouches. The findings suggest that people recognise that these products need to be regulated in the same way as cigarettes and vapes and support action to bring the UK’s policies up to date. 

Beyond nicotine pouch regulation, the survey also revealed support for government plans to introduce a licensing scheme for the sale of vapes (82%).  Concern for young people’s well-being in digital spaces was also evident. 81% of respondents agreed there should be age restrictions on using social media, while 75% backed the recent law on ID checks before accessing online pornography. These figures highlight the public’s concern about the exposure of young people to harmful content online and support for stronger digital safeguards.

The survey results suggest that while many people feel the UK is becoming a ‘nanny state’, there are specific areas where they support the introduction of additional regulation.

The areas where respondents supported increasing regulation are:

1. Introducing new regulations for nicotine pouches – 84%
2. Creating a licensing scheme for the sale of vapes – 82%
3. Age restrictions on social media – 81%
4. Compulsory physical education in schools – 78%
5. ID checks before accessing online pornography – 75%
6. School dinner nutrition regulations – 74%

Markus Lindblad, Head of External Affairs at Northerner, said: “These results show that there are some areas of modern life where the public wants the government to take a more active role and to introduce new regulations. A good example is the overwhelming support for the regulation of nicotine pouches. On this issue, the public, government, and responsible retailers are totally aligned. At the moment, a legal loophole means that there is no minimum age limit on the purchase of nicotine pouches, and this has been exploited by unscrupulous retailers. This survey shows that the public wants action, and there is strong support for the government’s move to close this loophole through the Tobacco and Vapes Bill.”

A public health expert who once served as a director in the World Health Organization (WHO) has explained why a stronger focus on harm reduction is needed in global tobacco control.

Professor Tikki Pang, now part of Jakarta-based Centre for Healthcare Policy and Reform Studies, said 20 years ago the WHO introduced the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which has been ratified by 183 countries covering 90% of the global population.

He said the FCTC has led to a significant reduction in smoking prevalence around the world, particularly in rich and developed countries, helping to prevent or delay up to 24 million deaths over time.

“Since smoking causes 85% of lung cancers, which in turn account for 20% of all cancer deaths worldwide, this represents a major achievement for the FCTC,” he said at the Asia Forum on Nicotine.

However, Pang said that despite this early success, there were still 8 million deaths annually linked to smoking, with 4 out of 5 of these deaths occurring in lower-middle-income countries.

He said there were two reasons for this, namely the relatively slow implementation of FCTC articles by signatory countries, and the non-recognition of less harmful and alternative tobacco products as a means to curb smoking.

He said this was despite “overwhelming evidence” of the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of these (alternative) products used by some 130 million people around the world.

“Despite all of this, global health authorities have adopted a very strong anti-tobacco harm reduction (THR) stance.

“(They) actually state that these products are as harmful as combustible cigarettes and call on their member states to ban them and actually give awards to countries which have done so.”

Pang described this resistance as the “elephant in the room” and a “key barrier” to the wider adoption of THR.

He said this was because many lower and lower-middle-income countries looked to the WHO for guidance in terms of setting their own policies.

On the way forward, Pang mooted the establishment of independent, evidence-driven platforms involving key stakeholders to improve dialogue and coordination.

He said such platforms could exist outside the FCTC structure and bring stakeholders, including producers, consumers, and investors, together to achieve five goals.

This, Pang said, included demanding and improving the transparency and inclusivity in global decision-making processes.

“Two, place tobacco harm reduction in the broader context of noncommunicable diseases, the Sustainable Development Goals and universal healthcare.

“Third, aim for more inclusive and effective stakeholder engagement across civil society, industry, consumers, professional societies, etc.”

Another goal would be to broaden the definition of tobacco control and advocate for risk-proportional regulation.

“And finally, work with governments to highlight and disseminate success stories from countries that have been supportive of THR, perhaps through a storytelling approach.”

However, he acknowledged there would be challenges in bringing the various stakeholders together.

Pang ended his keynote, saying he has become a supporter for THR due to “overwhelming scientific evidence” and its value in helping smoking cessation.

He also cited a quote from renowned physician Alex Wodak, that the current opposition to THR was becoming obsolete.

“And I quote Alex – WHO’s position on this issue is now as irrelevant as the position of governments in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in the 1980s on the future of central command economies. WHO’s position will collapse at some point, but I don’t know when.”

Meanwhile, in one of the sessions at the forum, Professor Dr. Sharifa Ezat Wan Puteh, who chairs the Malaysian Society of Harm Reduction (MSHR), shared similar sentiments on THR.

She said there was actually nothing new about harm reduction, having been used in HIV prevention and drug therapy.

However, she noted this was not the case for tobacco.

“A lot of Asian countries are also members of the FCTC, so they follow what the WHO says. Anything with tobacco plus nicotine is seen as something harmful.”

She said the way forward would be for tobacco harm reduction to be recognised as part of comprehensive public health strategies, though she admitted this was unlikely.

Ultimately, both experts agreed that reframing tobacco harm reduction as part of broader public health strategies could open the door to more inclusive and effective policies in the years ahead.

Open letter from International Tobacco Growers’ Association president José Javier Aranda:

Dear Members, Partners, and Friends inside and outside our sector,

Today, we proudly celebrate World Tobacco Growers’ Day, a tradition observed worldwide to honor the people and communities who dedicate their lives to this sector.
On this occasion, I want to recognize our resilience and share a message of strength and hope. The reality is that our sector often finds itself at the crossroads of pressures coming from many different fronts. That is why we must remain vigilant, united, and determined.

In just 20 days, the WHO FCTC Conference of the Parties (COP) will take place in Geneva. While the official agenda contains no items directly addressing tobacco growers or tobacco production, history has shown us how misleading COP procedures can be. During the last COP, for example, an additional item was introduced without the consensus of the Parties.
Such a lack of transparency in decision-making procedures raises serious concerns and undermines trust in the process. As growers, whose livelihoods and communities are directly affected, we cannot ignore these risks.

Since the creation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and for years now, tobacco growers, workers, and their families have been under constant scrutiny. What began as a well-intentioned effort to control and diminish tobacco consumption has evolved into an exclusionary movement. It is now largely driven by radical anti-tobacco activists who show no intention of understanding the pressures faced by communities whose livelihoods depend heavily on tobacco cultivation.
Discussions about measures to control tobacco production are taking place under the auspices of the COP meetings. Yet, the representation within these forums is strikingly unbalanced:

• Less than 5% of delegates have expertise or knowledge in agriculture,
• Less than 3% have any understanding of tobacco growing, and
• Only about 8% of the participating countries have significant tobacco production.

This imbalance is compounded by a severe lack of transparency from the WHO FCTC Secretariat. Under a legally questionable interpretation of Article 5.3, they have excluded every stakeholder directly linked to tobacco growing.

Let me be clear: we understand the concerns about the negative impact of tobacco consumption, and we support policies that are genuinely aimed at reducing harm. But what we cannot understand is why tobacco growers and their representatives are given such a fundamentally different treatment compared to other sectors.

Take, for example, the alcohol industry—which has its place at the negotiating table. Tobacco, on the other hand, is the only sector bound by a UN-specific treaty, the FCTC. And within this treaty, Article 5.3 has been repeatedly used—and misused—to exclude us, while governments and the public are kept in the dark about the discussions inside COP meetings.

What is even more concerning is that public money—our money, generated by us taxpayers—is being used to fuel this anti-tobacco lobby, sustaining hundreds of NGOs that work to silence and exclude us.

As representatives of tobacco growers, we cannot remain silent. We raise our voice today to condemn this misconduct of the WHO FCTC Secretariat. Our governments must stand with us.

I have already sent a letter to the WHO and the WHO FCTC, calling for transparency and inclusion. We expect to be heard.
On this World Tobacco Growers’ Day, let us celebrate our resilience, reaffirm our unity, and raise our demand to be heard united in this demand, so that our governments can support us in this plea—for fairness, for inclusion, and for the right to be part of the decisions that directly affect our lives and our communities.

PRESS RELEASE

When ANC Treasurer-General and former Gauteng Health MEC Dr Gwen Ramokgopa took the podium at the Progressive Business Forum (PBF) Colloquium on the Promotion of a Healthy Lifestyle and Wellness recently, her message was as pragmatic as it was progressive: South Africa cannot afford to let ideology stand in the way of evidence.

Citing examples from public-health victories such as condom distribution during the HIV crisis, seatbelt laws, and reduced sugar and salt content in foods, Dr Ramokgopa framed harm reduction as a principle long embedded in South Africa’s health journey — and one that must now be extended to new and emerging areas of risk, including tobacco and substance use.

“We debated around whether we should give out free condoms, but we knew that harm would be reduced. We don’t ban the eating of bread,” she said. “We say, let’s reduce half in this way and that way. The seat belt was innovated by public health practitioners. They didn’t want to stop the use of vehicles, but they said, let’s reduce harm.”

Her argument was clear: harm reduction is not permissiveness — it’s progress. It’s a recognition that real people make real choices, and that health policy should help them make safer ones.

Building on that momentum, Dr Percy Mkhulu Selepe, Acting COO of the Gauteng Department of Health, issued a call that resonated across the room and beyond:
“As government, we are convinced that science must lead policy. We have to stimulate new ways of thinking about harm reduction, not only in theory, but in lived realisation.”

Those words marked a quiet but meaningful turning point. For decades, public-health debates in South Africa have been driven by moral arguments and political instinct. The colloquium, however, revealed a growing appetite among government and researchers to replace ideology with evidence and to recognise that harm reduction, not punishment, saves lives.

Selepe’s statement challenges South Africa’s tendency to treat substance use as a moral failing rather than a health issue. Whether the subject is tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs, evidence shows that punitive policies drive problems underground, while compassionate, data-driven approaches reduce harm and rebuild trust.

“We have not funded anything on harm reduction”

At the same event, Professor Monique Marks, a harm reduction activist, reminded policymakers that while harm reduction is widely discussed, it remains largely unfunded in South Africa:
“There is not a single government-provided harm reduction program in the country — all of them are in non-profit or non-governmental spaces. We have funded supply reduction and demand reduction, but nothing that truly meets people where they are.”

Marks’ statement laid bare the contradiction between South Africa’s progressive rhetoric and its entrenched abstinence-based approach. “We need to recognise that people use substances for complex reasons,” she added. “Punishing or shaming them has never worked. Meeting people where they are, with compassion and evidence-based options, does.”

Her point is not ideological, it’s mathematical. Every smoker who switches from combustible cigarettes to a scientifically validated, regulated smoke-free alternative dramatically reduces exposure to harmful toxins. For a health system under strain, that shift could mean fewer hospitalisations, lower costs, and more lives saved.

Without budgetary and policy support, harm reduction remains an idea rather than a practice. And yet, as global examples show, from Portugal’s decriminalisation model to the UK’s safer nicotine product regulation, science-led harm reduction saves lives, lowers health costs, and strengthens public trust.

Harm reduction: the next frontier

Echoing Marks’ call for government to invest in harm reduction science, Gastroenterologist Professor Obedy Mwantembe urged that future research, including African-led studies, should explore the nuanced effects of nicotine and other lifestyle factors on disease.

He emphasised that obesity, inactivity, alcohol, and smoking are all key modifiable risks which require interdisciplinary collaboration and modern communication tools to drive behavioural change.

At the same time, Professor Tivani Mashamba-Thompson, Deputy Dean at the University of Pretoria’s Faculty of Health Sciences, said harm reduction must include infectious disease prevention and treatment. Harm reduction services such as those targeting injection drug users must include screening and treatment for HCV, which remains a neglected area in public health planning.

“When we talk about harm reduction, it is not only about behavioural change; it’s also about biomedical interventions that prevent the spread of infections like HIV and Hepatitis C. We must integrate HCV testing and care into our harm reduction programmes. When people come for help, we cannot separate their addiction from their infection risk.”

She repeatedly stressed that policy must be guided by local science rather than imported models, and that African research institutions must lead data generation on harm reduction including for infectious diseases like HCV.

While tobacco remains South Africa’s most stubborn and costly addiction, killing thousands of citizens a year, our national conversation still revolves around abstinence alone.

Mashamba-Thompson said that while quitting completely is the ultimate goal, many users struggle with cessation.
“Safer alternatives such as nicotine-replacement therapies, e-cigarettes, or other regulated smoke-free products can significantly reduce harm.”

Science plus compassion equals progress

All three academics underscored that stigma remains one of the biggest obstacles. Fear of judgment keeps people from seeking help. The antidote, said Mashamba-Thompson, is empathy:
“Harm reduction is not only about reducing immediate risk, it’s also about dismantling stigma, rebuilding trust, and ensuring that no population is left behind while easing the burden on our health systems.”

Dr Selepe’s insistence that policy must follow science is therefore more than a bureaucratic slogan – it is a moral imperative. Science tells us what works; compassion tells us how to make it work for real people.

If Gauteng’s stance becomes national practice, South Africa could finally modernise its approach to public health. It would mean funding harm-reduction programmes, regulating safer nicotine products rather than banning them, and partnering with communities instead of policing them.

Dr Ramokgopa emphasised that the issue extends beyond individual choices to national wellbeing:
“The disease burden in our country, in our continent and in the world is too heavy for any economy to carry,” she said. “Better health contributes to positive growth. The role of these platforms is to ensure that we all communicate and talk together.”

Her words serve as a reminder that collaboration between science, policy and society is not optional but essential if South Africa is to lighten its health burden and unlock its full human potential.

The alternative, moral grandstanding and outdated legislation, keeps millions trapped in cycles of illness and exclusion.

The PBF colloquium closed with a collective call to act: researchers, policymakers, and civil-society leaders must collaborate to design policies that are scientifically sound, socially just, and human-centred.

As Professor Marks puts it:
“We have to stop pretending that harm reduction is radical — it’s not. It’s evidence-based, it’s cost-effective, and it saves lives. Around the world, governments are leading this work. In South Africa, civil society is carrying it alone.”

PRESS RELEASE

New data indicate the UK will miss the target of becoming a smoke-free society by 2030 

New analysis by Haypp has revealed that efforts to achieve a smoke-free status for the UK by 2030 are falling short. The data indicate that if the current rate of decline in smoking rates continues, the UK will not achieve smoke-free status until at least 2033. 

In collaboration with Swedish economist David Sundén, Haypp has analysed the decline in smoking rates across the EU and the UK and calculated when each country is on track to become smoke-free. Looking at the results for the nations of the UK, England is slightly ahead of its neighbours and is expected to reach smoke-free status in 2032. Wales and Scotland are not far behind, with Wales expected to achieve smoke-free status in 2033 and Scotland in 2034. However, Northern Ireland is significantly further behind and is not predicted to become smoke-free until 2037. 

The analysis also looks at Sweden’s progress towards smoke-free status, and identifies October 25th 2025, as the day Sweden will become the first European country and one of the first in the world to be smoke-free. That is based on the World Health Organisation definition of smoke-free, which is a country where less than 5% of the population are daily smokers.

David Sundén explains: “While it is of course very difficult to pinpoint an exact date, based on my calculations and publicly available statistics, October 25 is the date that Sweden becomes smoke-free according to the WHO definition.”

In the UK, despite recent significant reductions in the daily smoking rate due to large numbers of smokers switching to alternatives such as vapes, the rate is still as high as 11.9%. The rate of reduction in the UK may be slowing as some regions have seen a growth in smoking rates over the past year, and the number of smokers switching to vapes is plateauing. The average daily smoking rate across Europe also remains high at 16.6%.

Among younger populations, the difference is even more significant. Among Swedish young people, the rate of daily smokers is very low, at only 2.3 per cent. In the UK, among 18 – 24 year-olds, the rate is 9.8%. Across Europe, the youth smoking rate is still as high as 12.1 per cent.

David continued: “We based our analysis on the official statistics of daily smokers in all EU countries and the UK and compared the trends over time. But it’s no coincidence that Sweden is set to go smoke-free first. Sweden has had relatively high cigarette taxes for a long time. That makes smoking more expensive and less attractive for people. But just as important is the availability of alternatives: snus and, later, nicotine pouches. People haven’t been forced to choose between trying to quit nicotine altogether or continuing to smoke; they’ve had access to alternative products. It’s that combination that makes Sweden top of the smoke-free leaderboard.”

In 2025 alone, smoking is expected to cause at least 38,232 deaths among males aged 35+ in the UK. However, if the UK were to adopt Sweden’s progressive smoke-free policies and more males were to switch from smoking to nicotine pouches, this number could be reduced dramatically, preventing up to 20,788 deaths each year.

Markus Lindblad, Director of External Affairs at Haypp, said: “This data is evidence that the Swedish approach to harm reduction is effective. For a long time, we have been campaigning and raising awareness of the benefits of smokers switching to alternative products. We can see what has worked in Sweden, and as the Tobacco and Vapes Bill moves through Parliament, the UK has an opportunity to recognise the role alternative nicotine products can play in stamping out smoking.”