Blog

Feeling the Squeeze

Photo: Taco Tuinstra

A crackdown on vapes has pushed some Chinese companies out of business and encouraged others to prioritize international sales.

By Stefanie Rossel

China is the world’s center of e-cigarette production, accounting for approximately 90 percent of vapor hardware. Between 2022 and 2023, China’s vape product exports increased 12 percent, according to ECigIntelligence. Domestically, however, the vape category seems condemned to disappear, although with over 350 million smokers and an estimated annual smoking-related death rate of more than a million, the country’s potential for reduced-risk products is huge. This year, the country’s vaping population stands at 3.5 million, ECigIntelligence estimates.
The rise of China’s internal vape market was short-lived. Initially, there was little awareness of e-cigarettes in the country. In 2013, domestic vape sales surpassed $13.75 million, and the sector continued to grow rapidly until November 2021, when China’s State Tobacco Monopoly Administration (STMA), the administrative arm of China National Tobacco Corp., which with around 2.5 trillion cigarettes a year is the world’s largest producer, asserted its authority over the vape industry.
In November 2022, the Electronic Cigarette Management Measures (ECMM) took effect, putting substantial restraints on manufacturers catering to the domestic market. The measures regulate the production, sale, marketing and import and export of all vape products, including cartridges, vape sets and products sold as a combination of cartridges and sets, but not heated-tobacco products, which will be regulated as traditional cigarettes.
It is worth noting that the ECMM legalized an industry whose legal status was previously dubious. Whether the legal space it gives vape manufacturers is enough to keep their domestic business viable is questionable, however; none of the companies approached was prepared to comment on the record.
Among other requirements, the new regulations prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes with flavors other than tobacco on the domestic market. The document also sets a wide range of technical standards, including permitted ingredients and additives, nicotine levels, testing and safety standards and accreditation. Manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers of vape products are required to obtain a license from the STMA and are obliged to process all transactions through an e-cigarette transaction platform overseen by the monopoly. Other measures include prohibition of vape product advertising and a ban on e-cigarette sales through vending machines or any other self-service mechanism.
Shortly after the ECMM entered into force, e-cigarettes became subject to a consumption tax. The rate for the production and import of e-cigarettes is 36 percent while the rate for wholesale is 11 percent.

Sharp Decline

Mercedes Gorgni
The ECMM follows a tightening of other rules, such as the decision at the end of 2019 to ban the online sale and advertising of e-cigarettes in response to concerns about underage vaping. In April 2022, the STMA released a new set of trial policy measures, which sought to control the structure of the e-cigarette industry by regulating where production capacity is concentrated and dictating the distribution of vape product retail outlets.
One-and-a-half years after their introduction, the rules have taken a toll on domestic vape sales. “The market uninterruptedly grew from 2017 up to 2020 when the online ban of e-cigarette sales dampened the growth. However, the increasing popularity of prefilled pods and the increase in prices still generated a 26 percent growth rate compared with 2019 despite the setback in accessibility,” says Mercedes Gorgni, China analyst at ECigIntelligence.
“The peak of the market was reached in 2021 at an estimated RMB19.7 billion ($2.7 billion) with 7 million adult vape users. Regulations in 2022 resulted in a sharp decline in the domestic market. The market value is estimated to have shrunk to RMB9.3 billion in 2023 and 3.8 million users due to restricted flavors, tax-induced price increase and a declining number of retailers offering products.”
The shift in regulations, Gorgni says, posed a challenge for smaller and medium-sized companies within the industry, as adapting became increasingly difficult. “On the other hand, leading firms such as RELX leveraged their superior capabilities and resources to meet these stringent government demands, securing approval by the first half of 2022. RELX was—and still is—the leading brand in China. During 2021–2022, net revenue of Fog Core Technology, RELX’s holding company, saw the impact of the new regulations, dropping from RMB8.5 billion to RMB5.3 billion, with a further decline in 2023 when revenues fell to RMB1.5 billion.”
The new regulatory environment, which favors larger companies capable of meeting the complex technical requirements, has incentivized domestic brands toward seeking opportunities beyond national borders, Gorgni explains. “It’s only natural that leading domestic brands like RELX, Yooz and Moti are now also pivoting their focus toward international markets as a strategic move to diversify their product offerings and mitigate investment risks. At the same time, several Chinese manufacturers are relocating to Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia and Malaysia, making the most of the benefits of lower labor costs and more favorable trade tariffs, thereby enhancing their competitive edge in the global market.”
More recently, RELX’s market share has declined as other, mostly compatible, pod brands are widely sold informally, mainly via online platforms such as WeChat, Douyin or Xiaohongshu, in flavors other than tobacco and flavored disposables. “The illegal or informal market has certainly expanded, especially due to the availability of flavored disposable vapes sold online at significantly lower prices than on vape or retail stores,” says Gorgni.
China’s illicit vape market is significant yet challenging to accurately quantify. With the government intensifying its crackdown on e-cigarettes, physical sales have become increasingly difficult. “However, the online black market is flourishing, offering popular models such as the ‘bubble teacup’ or other designs featuring cartoons, typically coming in sweet flavors and large capacities,” says Gorgni. “Moreover, pods designed to be compatible with RELX devices, indistinguishable in design and available in over 20 flavors from various brands like VS, Yeeg and Zgar, can easily be purchased with just a conversation on WeChat. These vapes are then discreetly shipped to buyers through common mail, a practice that has become widespread with the rise of e-commerce platforms like Taobao. Some vape shops surveyed by ECigIntelligence have also started adapting to this situation, acknowledging that a portion of their customer base prefers to have their purchases mailed to them given the inconvenience of visiting physical stores.”

Focus on Exports

Offline enforcement of e-cigarette sales regulations is stringent, according to Gorgni. “Conversations with the Electronic Cigarette Chamber of Commerce, which represents over 650 manufacturers in Shenzhen, have revealed there will be an increase in government crackdowns over the next four months. This enhanced enforcement aims to limit the growing illegal market for vaping products in China,” she says.
Many retailers have already gone out of business following implementation of the ECMM. Prior to the regulations, the market was flooded with a vast number of specialist and generic e-cigarette retail points, with approximately 190,000 retail stores and 47,500 specialist vape retailers operating across the country, according to Gorgni. “After the new regulations, which required retailers to get authorization to sell e-cigarettes, took effect, the number of specialist retail points plunged to under 15,000, signaling a significant shift in the industry landscape,” she says.
“Retail stores can now apply either for a license to sell e-cigarettes or traditional tobacco, incentivizing retail chains and supermarkets to play safe and possibly to maintain combustible cigarette sales. In 2022, a survey carried by ECigIntelligence showed that more than 70 percent of legal e-cigarette retailers faced financial challenges, with less than 10 percent remaining profitable.”
Online, enforcing the new rules proves more challenging. “Sellers skillfully navigate the digital landscape by continuously opening new accounts, using alternative terms in posts and comments to avoid direct references to e-cigarettes, and engaging with potential customers through comments on popular videos and posts,” says Gorgni. “This method of operating under the radar complicates efforts to monitor and control the online sale of e-cigarettes, underscoring the complexities involved in regulating the digital aspect of the vaping market.”
The regulatory measures were introduced in accordance with the country’s “Healthy China 2030 Plan,” which was released in 2016 and calls for a comprehensive strengthening of tobacco control to reduce the smoking rate to 20 percent among adults over the age of 15 by 2030. So far, progress remains slow. According to Gorgni, more than 25 percent of Chinese aged 18 and over were smokers in 2022, with men making up more than half of the smoking population. “With the focus on regulating e-cigarettes more strictly and limiting the availability of flavored vapes, consumers who previously turned to vaping as an alternative to smoking may revert to traditional cigarettes. It is expected that smoking rates may stabilize or even increase slightly,” she says.
With the increasing focus on exports and the growth of the global vape market, Chinese vape manufacturers will likely continue to prioritize overseas markets due to the challenges and restrictions in their own domestic market. “The export volume of disposable vapes has been rapidly increasing, proving a shift toward international markets,” says Gorgni. “Enforcement being done by governments, like the U.S., is vital to avoid their population accessing low-quality vapes and eventually suffering the consequences. The STMA is aware of this situation and has made its regulations accordingly. Western governments should make use of this and improve communication with its Chinese counterparts to curb contraband practices and protect their own population.”

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.

May 1, 2024
Driving Transformation

Photos: BAT

BAT’S new U.K. Innovation Center demonstrates the company’s commitment to become a predominantly smokeless business.

By George Gay

Is BAT edging into the field of transhumanism, specifically democratic transhumanism? This thought struck me when, during an introductory presentation ahead of a tour of BAT’s new U.K. Innovation Center in Southampton, the company’s director of research and science, James Murphy, described the range of BAT products now on offer, a seven-category range that transcends nicotine to include well-being and stimulation products.
Using science, technology and innovation to take human beings to the next level is, of course, a rough definition of transhumanism, and doing so with a product that can be afforded by most people would put this project into the realm of democratic transhumanism. Certainly, such speculation is not at odds with BAT’s stated aim of creating “A Better Tomorrow.”
On a more practical level, what to me was most significant about the Innovation Center and the research and development site within which it sits was the ambition on display. Hundreds of specialists are working there on prototype smokeless tobacco and nicotine products, on scientific research to determine the relative risk of using such products compared to smoking cigarettes and on building capabilities beyond nicotine. This is tobacco harm reduction (THR) plus—writ large.

Doing Good and Making Money

Of course, a lot of people opposed to or unconvinced of the benefits of THR claim that the major tobacco companies are only in business to turn a handsome profit and don’t care about the harm they cause nor about reducing it. And it is true that these companies are hugely profitable. Murphy mentioned that BAT had reported revenues of just over £27 billion ($33.93 billion) and profits of about £12.5 billion in its latest full-year results. But what seems to get lost in this argument is that it is possible to do good while making a handsome profit: one only need look at pharmaceutical companies to realize this is true. Indeed, perhaps it is necessary to make such profits because the investments needed to reinvent an industry, which is what is happening in respect of the tobacco industry, are not inconsiderable.
That BAT is reinventing its business can be seen from the fact that of the just-over £27 billion in revenue the company earned, £3.5 billion came from its new category business. Again, the cynics will point out that the new category business made up only a relatively small part of the overall business. And again, this is true, but that reading of the situation needs some grounding. BAT launched its first new category product only in 2013, so while it has been manufacturing traditional tobacco products and people have been consuming those products for more than 100 years, it has been offering new category products for just over 10 years. Additionally, while combustible tobacco products are on sale universally, because regulatory climates vary around the world, the sale of reduced-risk, noncombustible products is allowed only on about 55 percent to 60 percent of markets, something that Murphy chalked up as one of the challenges BAT faced. How, he wondered aloud, could more regulators be encouraged to embrace THR?
Unfortunately, if the February Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) (see “Doubling Down on Failure,” page 12) is anything to go by, the answer to Murphy’s question must be, “with difficulty.” Apparently, the Global Alliance on Tobacco Control, previously known as the Framework Convention Alliance, used COP10 to hand its “Dirty Ashtray” award to the Philippines for having had the temerity to promote THR.
And while the intellectual debate around THR bumps along the bottom in this way, there seems little hope of quickly expanding the number of markets where regulated THR products are made available. Not surprisingly, the WHO holds sway in many countries, especially those that find it difficult to fund independent health research.

The investment in the Southampton facility follows the opening of BAT’s Innovation Centers in Italy and China.

The Promise of New Products

This is all very sad because those who call the FCTC shots refuse to engage with the tobacco industry even though the industry has much to say that is informed and interesting to anybody concerned with reducing the harm caused by cigarette smoking. And one industry voice worth listening to is that of Elaine Round, a geneticist who is head of the global life sciences team at Southampton, where she has been for two years on an international assignment for U.S.-based R.J. Reynolds, which BAT bought in 2017.
Alongside Murphy, Round took part in the introductory presentation to a group of journalists, and it soon became clear that while she was involved in the THR quest in a scientific capacity, she also had skin in the game. Before describing some of the results of the emissions and toxicology tests that BAT carries out on its three main reduced-risk products, Round mentioned that she had joined Reynolds in 2008 when she saw a job description that indicated the company was making efforts around harm reduction. At that time, she said, people in her family smoked, and she wanted to make sure they had options to use reduced-risk products if they were unwilling to quit.
That timeline, which suggests that the tobacco industry has been concerned with THR for longer than most people realize, probably needs some explanation. Reynolds was in the vanguard of the quest for reduced-risk products and, as far as I am aware, was the first company to produce a heated-tobacco product (HTP). That product, which was different from the HTPs available today and which, for various reasons, was commercially unsuccessful, nevertheless provided a spark that was later to be reignited.
The three main reduced-risk products described by Round comprised the vaping device Vuse, the HTP Glo and the oral nicotine pouch Velo, for which BAT scientists have published respectively 81, 85 and 25 peer-reviewed studies. Vuse delivered toxicant levels 99 percent lower than those of a combustible cigarette, Round said, while Glo delivered toxicant levels 90 percent to 95 percent lower, and Velo delivered toxicant levels 99 percent lower compared with those of cigarette smoke.
Velo nicotine pouches must comprise one of the most interesting reduced-risk products to emerge in recent years because they produce toxicant levels down even on those of snus, an oral product that has been credited with helping to reduce the smoking rate in Sweden to around 5 percent and having thereby sent lung cancer rates in that country crashing. Indeed, nicotine pouches sit comfortably alongside nicotine-replacement therapy products on the continuum of risk and are perhaps the most environmentally friendly of all the reduced-risk products being used to assist smokers to move away from cigarettes. It is not surprising, therefore, that BAT has demonstrated its confidence in this product by including in its Innovation Center a nicotine pouch pilot plant that allows researchers to go from concept to trial product in an hour.

At BAT’s Southampton Innovation Center, specialists are working on prototype smokeless tobacco and nicotine products, on scientific research to determine the relative risk of such products compared to smoking cigarettes and on building capabilities beyond nicotine.

Supporting the Mission

Officially opened on March 7 in the presence of BAT’s entire management board, the Innovation Center is housed within BAT’s Southampton research and development facility, which has been in operation since 1956 on a site occupied by the company for more than 100 years. In a press note, BAT said the £30 million investment in the Innovation Center would support its mission to become a predominantly smokeless business in which 50 percent of its revenue was derived from noncombustibles by 2035.
The group of journalists, of which I was one, was given, on March 8, a tour of the Innovation Center, entering by way of a vast atrium that put me in mind of going to school in a finger-concealing blazer with the words of my mother ringing in my ears, “you’ll soon grow into it.” Clearly, bigger and better things will be happening there in the years to come. Some of the Innovation Center was off limits because of commercial sensitivities, and we passed various spaces that were yet to be occupied. But we were taken into a large flavors laboratory, which is likely to be at the forefront of the battle to keep reduced-risk products appealing to adult consumers while complying with the seemingly inevitable restrictions imposed by regulators fearful of these products being used by those underaged. Overlooking the working, clean-space, nicotine-pouch pilot plant from a room above and adjacent to it was a highlight of the tour, but I was amazed, too, at the large number of specialists working at computers on new product design, until it was pointed out to me that products must be customized to a certain extent to meet the regulatory requirements and consumer preferences of many different markets.
The Innovation Center provides nine specially designed technical spaces to aid the development of BAT’s portfolio of new category products. “These spaces are dedicated to research for modern oral nicotine pouches, for liquids and flavor for vapor products, for heated products and for well-being and stimulation beyond nicotine,” the press note said. “The investment will also support work on packaging, engineering, innovation development and system integration ….
“The new facilities will bring together cross-functional and key R&D teams—with 400 highly specialized scientists and engineers, drawn from a range of fields, including biotechnology and clinical trials. These teams will accelerate the development of the next generation of BAT’s new category products and provide the robust evidence necessary to encourage adult smokers to switch to less risky alternatives, backed by science.”

The inclusion of a nicotine pouch pilot plant at the Innovation Center demonstrates BAT’s confidence in the product category.

A Positive Path

Meanwhile, BAT said it had more than 1,600 specialists spread across the U.K., the U.S., Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia and China. “The £30 million investment in the Southampton facility follows the opening of BAT’s Innovation Centers in Trieste, Italy, in 2021 and in Shenzhen, China, in 2022, and an investment of £300 million a year in R&D to develop new category products and establish substantiation of their reduced-risk potential,” the company said.
This summary of the totality of BAT’s investment in R&D is significant because it gives an indication of the capability uplift the company has had to bring about within its ranks during a relatively short time and therefore its commitment to THR and, more latterly, well-being products. In 1956, and for a long time afterward, the R&D carried out at Southampton would have involved mostly scientists working with tobacco while in recent years, it has had to venture into fields formerly far beyond its comfort zone, so it has had to recruit, for instance, software engineers, formulation chemists and flavorists.
I started this piece by speculating about whether BAT was venturing into transhumanism. That was a bit of a stretch, but it is worth noting that the company, at Southampton and its other Innovation Centers, is carrying on in a specialist field the humanist project that stretches back to the Enlightenment and the use of scientific methods to better understand the world and the place of humans within it. The cynics will point out that the Enlightenment journey has not always wound up in good places, and, again, this is true, but I cannot see how anybody could argue that the general direction of travel has not been hugely positive. Science-led THR, properly applied, follows in that direction.

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.

May 1, 2024
Doubling Down on Failure

Photo: v-a-butenkov

The FCTC COPs comprise a counterproductive, environment-busting waste of time and money.

By George Gay

If COP10 proved one thing, it is that there should be no COP11.
The continuing existence of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), which is seemingly controlled by a coterie of authoritarian, publicity-shy, self-appointed morality overseers and to which supposedly sovereign governments humbly send their delegates to worship at the altar of the FCTC Secretariat, is an affront to the environment and to the taxpayers who part fund these COP affairs and whose taxes could be better spent feeding and otherwise providing for people currently in desperate need.
From the information that seeps out, everything that gets done at these secretive affairs could be done through emails and the odd telephone call. It seems unconscionable, verging on suicidal, that, with 2023 having marked the first time that every day within a year, the temperature exceeded 1 degree Celsius above the 1850–1900 preindustrial level, with close to 50 percent of days 1.5 degrees above and two days in November, for the first time, more than 2 degrees above,* more than 1,000 COP delegates should kick off 2024 by flying to Panama supposedly as part of a health initiative. This was insanity on stilts.
I asked the organizers what the carbon footprint of the event was, but answer came there none, so one must assume that while the secretariat likes to interest itself in the environmental impact of tobacco, it is unconcerned about keeping its own house in order. In other words, it is safe to assume that COP10 was a totally avoidable environmental disaster waved through so a few people could carry forward a vanity project aimed at their trying to interfere with the lifestyle choices of smokers.

Why should the diktats dreamed up by a tiny clique of would-be tobacco prohibitionists and lifestyle controllers be allowed to affect the choices of 1 billion adult smokers?

Limiting Choices and Threatening Livelihoods

Why should the diktats dreamed up by a tiny clique of would-be tobacco prohibitionists and lifestyle controllers be allowed to affect the choices of 1 billion adult smokers? Why should they be allowed to threaten the livelihoods of millions of tobacco growers, their families and those who work for tobacco companies and allied businesses?
The futility of COP10 was nicely, though unintentionally, summed up by one of the European Union delegates when, in his three-minute introductory slot, he said that the EU had been at the forefront of tobacco control and a driving force in negotiating the FCTC and its protocols, now an important component of the 2030 agenda for Sustainable Development (SD). Then, without offering any reason or apportioning any blame, he said that at the midway point of the 2030 SD agenda, 85 percent of the SD goals were off track and that nearly a third of the targets were in regression. Turning to the home front, he said that despite the introduction of tobacco control legislation and policies, smoking rates in the EU remained high, again without questioning why this might be the case.
Meanwhile, seemingly oblivious to the failures he had described, the delegate started to sum up by talking of the need to redouble joint efforts by saying that the EU remained fully committed to the FCTC and adding that by working together during the conference, delegates could take a step forward in their global tobacco control agenda. At first, I thought the delegate had taken as advice Walt Kelly’s put-down, “having lost sight of our objectives, we redoubled our efforts.” But then I realized this was not true because whereas I had assumed the main objective was to encourage people to quit tobacco smoking, the EU delegate’s objective was seemingly to implement WHO measures whether they worked or not.
He finished by saying, “Together, we can deliver sustainable progress and pave the way for a tobacco-free world where people can enjoy healthy lives with no one left behind.” Here we were into Candide territory where everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. Fortunately, the Ukraine delegate was there to remind delegates that this was not the best of all possible worlds and that tobacco consumption goes up when people are under stress, especially when they are constantly under the threat of death because their territory has been invaded by the forces of another country.

Whereas I had assumed the main objective was to encourage people to quit tobacco smoking, the EU delegate’s objective was seemingly to implement WHO measures whether they worked or not.

No Progress Without Change

Do the WHO and the delegates at these affairs really believe that by trying to force people to give up tobacco smoking, they will ensure everybody leads a healthy life, with no one left behind? What about the many people around the world daily facing rape, torture and violent death by invading forces or simply at the hands of their own less than benevolent governments? Will the multitudes afflicted by under-reported starvation, with their dying words, thank the delegates for saving them from the ills of tobacco? Will those vulnerable people deeply afraid of the arrival, on the WHO’s watch, of the next pandemic, offer thanks for being protected from a lifestyle choice they can protect themselves from? And do these delegates think that when we are all standing knee-deep in water following environmental breakdown, we shall thank them for removing the temptation of smoking, if for no other reason than because the matches would be too damp to light our tobacco? If they do, they need to get out more.
And they need to mend their bullying ways. One of the main reasons why there should be no COP11 is down to the disrespectful way the COP10 affair treated the Philippines. Apparently, the Global Alliance on Tobacco Control (GATC), previously known as the Framework Convention Alliance, in a puerile intervention in what should have been an adult debate, handed the country the GATC’s pathetic “Dirty Ashtray” award for having the temerity to promote tobacco harm reduction (THR). The Philippines is a sovereign democracy that decided after robust debate that the health of its people could be aided by allowing smokers access to safer alternatives to combustible cigarettes. It should continue along that path unless it, and it alone, decides otherwise. Its decisions should not be brought into question by a gaggle of anti-tobacco organizations whose existence is dependent on the continuing health of the tobacco industry but that is threatened by the rise of THR.
Indeed, the FCTC Secretariat and the GATC should, in any properly run debate, recuse themselves when matters of THR are raised since they could be seen as having a vested interest in not wanting the tobacco industry, especially the cigarette industry, to be fatally undermined—rather than suffering the flesh wounds the FCTC is able to inflict. That this is the case is supported by the existence of the COP byproduct, the Meeting of the Parties (MOP3, as it was in Panama) to the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, whose love affair with “track-and-trace” systems is aimed at ensuring tobacco manufacturing businesses retain their customers.
The best reaction to the GATC’s intervention would be for all nations that are committed to THR to withdraw from the FCTC, which is not going to change its ideology. And without change, there can be no progress.
But for all COP10’s faults, I cannot help wondering whether hypocrisy isn’t the very worst. I would suggest that a significant proportion of the more than 1,000 delegates and officials who attended the Panama affair drink alcohol. And I would further suggest that a good proportion of those are addicted, or regular drinkers, some of whom might be “problem drinkers.” How, I wonder, do these drinkers manage to take the moral high ground and condemn smokers? Do they have to stand on their empties? Isn’t that a little unstable? Or perhaps they are used to such balancing acts. Perhaps they are used to using just one eye to examine the damage done to individuals by their smoking while shutting the one that might focus on the even greater damage done to populations and societies at large by drinking. Sadly, I doubt that many have the level of self-awareness that would encourage them to engage with such issues. They exist in a closed world of self-righteous indignation.
Although that is not the way the secretariat sees things. COP10 headlined a post-conference press note with possibly the longest heading ever written: “COP10 adopted historic decisions to protect the environment from the harms of tobacco and to address cross-border tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship and the depiction of tobacco in entertainment media.”
How any of the above warrants the epithet “historic” is beyond me. The idea that what went on in Panama Feb. 5–10 should be regarded as famous or important in history is simply laughable. From what has emerged, COP10 was just another case of the same people using a lot of words to say the same things as they have said in the past. The only way that COP10 could write itself into the history books would be to do the decent thing and write FCTC COPs out of history.

Shrouded in Secrecy

How do I know that the same people said the same things? I don’t; I’m guessing; I have to guess. WHO COPs are conducted along the lines of secret society meetings by people supposedly so frightened that anybody should learn of the lack of intellectual rigor guiding their processes that delegates are required to go through a type of omerta ceremony, though, bizarrely, they seem to refer to it as the application of Chatham House Rules. Journalists and anybody with an independent mindset are not allowed to enter the hallowed halls of the conference.
Or are they? According to the press note with the longest heading, “COP10 was open to the media ….” But this does not chime with report after report by journalists and other interested parties who have complained about not being granted accreditation at any of the FCTC COPs due to a standard FCTC cop-out. One of the best brief reports on COP10 that I read was by Nick Powell for EU Reporter, who wrote, “Like many journalists, I was refused accreditation, but that made little difference as the conference voted to exclude the press.”
It is difficult to square these two takes on the situation. I did ask the organizers of the event about this, but answer came there none. All I can go on is that the overwhelming evidence points to the fact that Powell is correct. And this is probably admitted in the full sentence in the press note with the longest heading: “COP10 was open to the media, which had the opportunity to observe all public and open sessions, enabling reporters to witness more than 1,000 delegates from around the world unite over six days to consider and take action on important issues related to implementation of the convention.” It seems that this was obfuscation because there were few “public” or “open” sessions. I must admit that they had me fooled there for a minute, but then I thought that press notes, even those with the longest headings, were supposed to inform, not mislead.
Silly me. Health Policy Watch (HPW), obviously having read another post-event press note, quoted the WHO as saying: “Globally, some 200,000 hectares of land are cleared every year for tobacco cultivation, accounting for up to 20 percent of the annual increase in greenhouse gasses (GHGs).” But, as HPW pointed out, the WHO “failed to explain the source for the GHG estimate.”
And it could do with explaining something else. This is from the thoughtful COP10 conclusions of the International Tobacco Growers’ Association (ITGA): “ITGA, as the global tobacco growers’ representatives, observes with concern the impunity applied to using arguments against tobacco farming without providing reliable data. A fresh example is the WHO FCTC claim that 200,000 hectares of land are being cleared every year to grow tobacco when in fact, the harvested area of tobacco has consistently declined in the last decade.”

COP10 was just another case of the same people using a lot of words to say the same things as they have said in the past.

Avoiding Harm Reduction

But let me go back to Powell’s piece because it contained something else most interesting. He immediately followed the sentence quoted above with one saying: “That was shortly after the organizers cut off the microphone of a delegate who had the temerity to suggest that the priority should be harm reduction.” Of course, this incident makes a mockery of the statement in the press note with the longest heading that is quoted above as saying 1,000 delegates from around the world were united over six days. Clearly, they were not united. Questions around THR and less risky alternatives to combustible cigarettes had to be kicked down the road.
Powell did not say which delegate was cut off so rudely, and I can imagine there might be any number who would have wanted to make the point about THR, including those from the Philippines, of course, but I do know the U.K. delegation was supposed to make such an intervention. A meeting in the U.K.’s Houses of Parliament on Jan. 18 was told by Dame Andrea Leadsom, the parliamentary undersecretary of state for health and social care, that the U.K. delegation to COP10 would put forward its position that vapes comprised an important tool for helping adults quit tobacco smoking.
Leadsom was speaking during a backbench debate organized by Member of Parliament Andrew Lewer and aimed at uncovering what stance the government would take at COP10. Lewer, and others who spoke during the debate, were concerned that COP10 might resolve to establish equivalence in the regulation of combustible cigarettes and reduced-risk products, thus undermining the U.K.’s successful strategy of using vapes to help smokers quit their habit. Concern was expressed during the debate also about the fact that though the U.K. was a major contributor to the FCTC, it seemed diffident in its approach to tobacco COPs.
If backbenchers were hoping for a robust stance by the U.K. this time around, they must have been disappointed, at least in respect of the three-minute introductory presentation by the U.K. delegate, who did not mention THR and whose reference to vapes was confined to saying how the U.K. was concentrating on reducing the appeal of these products to children. I could not see whether she tugged her forelock when she declared commitment to the FCTC.
What a contrast to the New Zealand delegate’s brilliantly measured presentation where she spoke of the country’s pride in reaching tobacco control milestones and coming close to its goal of reducing the incidence of smoking below 5 percent. This had been achieved, she added, through a mix of FCTC-endorsed measures and the considered implementation of evidence-based harm reduction measures, including making available to smokers a range of nicotine-replacement products.
The question is, why should these pointless events continue. Most governments run by sentient creatures must know that FCTC COPs comprise a counterproductive, environment-busting waste of time and money. Safer alternative products can replace combustible cigarettes within a reasonable time. All that is needed is for those governments to apply and enforce consistent, light-touch but effective regulation to these products, ensure that messaging about them aimed at consumers is accurate, clear and consistent, and then sit back and let the private sector do the rest.
The FCTC has already ruled itself out of being a part of such a process.

*Figures from the European Commission’s Copernicus project

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.

May 1, 2024
Dan Gallagher President Smoker Friendly

Credit: Smoker Friendly

The Cigarette Store, which operates as Smoker Friendly, announced on Monday that Dan Gallagher will be its new president, effective April 17.

Gallagher has worked for the fuel and tobacco retailer since it was founded in 1991 and has been its executive vice president and chief operating officer since 2012. He’ll continue in those roles as he takes on the additional title of president, according to a press release.

Gallagher is replacing his brother Terry Gallagher Jr. as the president of Smoker Friendly. Terry Gallagher will remain the CEO and chairman of the board of the family-owned company.

Terry Gallagher Jr.

“Dan has been instrumental in the growth of Smoker Friendly since its inception and key in establishing the great culture we have in this company,” Terry Gallagher Jr. said in the release. “Those of you who have worked closely with Dan know he is very deserving of this role and extremely capable of leading this company.”

Smoker Friendly’s change at the president level comes during a busy period for the company, which is coming off a 54-store acquisition in March. Those locations, formerly Bob’s Discount Tobacco Shops in Indiana, are being rebranded to Smoker Friendly stores.

Boulder, Colorado-based Smoker Friendly owns and operates 342 stores across 13 states. The Cigarette Store is the largest tobacco store retailer in the U.S., operating a mix of tobacco stores, cigar lounges, liquor stores, and fueling locations under the Smoker Friendly, Tobacco Depot, Smoke ’N Go, Havana Manor, and Gasamat banners.

May 1, 2024
FDA Warns 14 Sellers of Illegal Flavored Vapes

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced on May 1 that it had sent warning letters to 14 online retailers. The reason for the warning letters was that these retailers were selling unauthorized e-cigarette products.

The warning letters specifically mentioned the sale of disposable e-cigarette products marketed under various brand names such as Elf Bar/EB Design, Esco Bars, Funky Republic, Hyde, Kang, Cali Bars, and Lost Mary, according to press release.

The retailers receiving these warning letters sold or distributed e-cigarette products in the United States that lack authorization from FDA, in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Warning letter recipients are given 15 working days to respond with the steps they will take to address the violation(s) cited in the warning letter and to prevent future violations. Failure to promptly address the violations can result in additional FDA actions such as an injunction, seizure, and/or civil money penalties.

The agency announced on April 30 that the U.S. Marshals Service seized more than 45,000 unauthorized e-cigarette products valued at more than $700,000 in California.

The seized products were mostly flavored, disposable e-cigarette products, including brands such as Puff Bar/Puff, Elf Bar/EB Design, Esco Bar, Kuz, Smok and Pixi.

May 1, 2024
22nd Century Eliminates Debt

Photo: Photo: Jade

22nd Century Group has entered into a binding letter of agreement to redeem $5.2 million in outstanding principal and interest associated with the Omnia subordinated note and outstanding warrants.
The agreement will exchange consideration of approximately $248,000 in cash, 1.15 million shares of common stock priced at $2.14 per share and 1.15 million shares of prefunded warrants priced at $2.14 per share as consideration of the debt. Additionally, the company will issue to Omnia 460,000 warrants with a term of five years and an exercise price of $2.14 per share.
“Paying Omnia at maturity with equity greatly improves our balance sheet, preserves cash for growing our operating business and significantly increases shareholder equity,” said Chairman and CEO Larry Firestone in a statement. “This transaction also reduces our monthly interest expense and adds to the progress made on increasing sales and margin while reducing operating costs. This is a key milestone toward reaching our goal of being cash positive in the first quarter of 2025.”

April 30, 2024
‘Vaping Might Boost Uranium Exposure’

Image: HTGanzo

Frequent teen vaping might boost the risk of exposure to lead and uranium, potentially harming brain and organ development, suggests research published online in the journal Tobacco Control.
To find out whether potentially toxic metal levels might be associated with vaping frequency and whether flavor might be influential, the researchers drew on responses to the U.S nationally representative Wave 5 (December 2018 to November 2019) of the PATH Youth Study.
Their urine samples were tested for the presence of cadmium, lead and uranium, and vaping frequency was designated as occasional (1–5 days/month), intermittent (6–19 days) and frequent (20+ days).
Vape flavors were grouped into four mutually exclusive categories: menthol or mint; fruit; sweet, such as chocolate or desserts; and others, such as tobacco, clove or spice, and alcoholic or non-alcoholic drinks.
Among the 200 exclusive vapers (63 percent female), 65 reported occasional use, 45 intermittent, and 81 frequent use; vaping frequency information was missing for 9.
In the preceding 30 days 1 in 3 (33 percent) vapers said they used menthol/mint flavors; half (50 percent) flavored fruit flavors; just over 15 percent opted for sweet flavors; and 2 percent used other flavors.
Analysis of the urine samples showed that lead levels were 40 percent higher among intermittent vapers, and 30 percent higher among frequent vapers than they were among occasional vapers. Urinary uranium levels were also twice as high among frequent vapers than among occasional vapers
Comparison of flavor types indicated 90 percent higher uranium levels among vapers who preferred sweet flavors than among those opting for menthol/mint.
No statistically significant differences were found in urinary cadmium levels between vaping frequency or flavor types.
Because this is an observational study, no definitive conclusions can be drawn about toxic metal levels and vaping frequency/flavors, according to the researchers, who also caution that the levels of toxic metals in vapes will vary by brand and type of vaporizer used.
Although urinary levels indicate chronic exposure, they were assessed at just one point in time, added to which the presence of uranium in the urine may be attributable to various sources including environmental exposure from natural deposits, industrial activities and dietary intake, they add.
“Nonetheless, these compounds are known to cause harm in humans,” the authors wrote in a press note. “Of particular concern were the increased uranium levels found within the sweet flavor category, they add.

April 30, 2024
King-size Smokes to Display Warnings
Photo: Adobe Stock
Starting today, every king-size cigarette sold in Canada must have a health warning printed on its filter section, reports CTV News.
The new advisories warn smokers in English and French of the products’ ability to cause impotence, leukemia and organ damage. Often a pioneer in tobacco policies, Canada is the first country to mandate such requirements.
When the measure took effect in August 2023, Ottawa gave tobacco companies and retailers a series of rolling deadlines to implement the rules. Tuesday’s deadline affects manufacturers with regard to king-size cigarettes only. According to Health Canada, the rule will apply to smaller, regular-size cigarettes on Jan. 31, 2025.
Retailers can carry king-size cigarettes without the new labels until July 31, 2024, and April 30, 2025, for the regular ones.
Once fully implemented, every cigarette sold in Canada will feature one of these six warnings:
Cigarettes damage your organs;
Cigarettes cause cancer;
Tobacco smoke harms children;
Cigarettes cause impotence;
Cigarettes cause leukemia; or
Poison in every puff.
The Canadian Cancer Society hopes the new labelling rules contribute to its goal of reducing smoking to 5 percent by 2035.
In 2001, Canada became the first country to require picture warnings on the outside of packages and small flyers with health messages inside them.
April 30, 2024
U.S. Marshals Seize Unauthorized Vapes

Photo: APchanel

The U.S. Marshals Service seized more than 45,000 unauthorized e-cigarette products valued at more than $700,000 in California. The seized products were mostly flavored, disposable e-cigarette products, including brands such as Puff Bar/Puff, Elf Bar/EB Design, Esco Bar, Kuz, Smok and Pixi.
“FDA has been unequivocally clear that we are committed to using the full scope of our enforcement tools—including seizures—to hold those who peddle unauthorized e-cigarettes accountable,” said Brian King, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products, in a statement. “The writing is on the wall for those in the tobacco product supply chain who fail to heed the law.”
This action represents the first time the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have seized tobacco products in coordination with the U.S. Marshals Service.
The seizure initially targeted products being held and sold by MDM Group, a distributor doing business as Eliquidstop.com. FDA issued a warning letter to MDM Group in May 2023, for offering unauthorized, flavored e-cigarette products for sale or distribution. In January 2024, FDA conducted a follow-up inspection of the firm and determined that it continued to commercially market its illegal products. While conducting the seizure at MDM’s facility, the agencies were informed that several firms may have an ownership interest in the unauthorized e-cigarettes seized.
As of April 2024, the FDA had issued approximately 670 warning letters to firms for manufacturing and/or distributing illegal e-cigarette products and issued more than 550 warning letters to retailers for the sale of unauthorized e-cigarettes. The agency has also filed civil money penalty complaints against more than 50 e-cigarette manufacturers and more than 100 retailers for manufacture and/or sale of unauthorized new tobacco products, as well as complaints for permanent injunction against seven e-cigarette manufacturers.

April 30, 2024
Larson to Direct Programs at FSFW

Elsa Larson (Photo: FSFW)
Elsa Larson has assumed the role of director of programs at the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World.
In this new role, Larson will assist with strategic planning, review, analysis and implementation of grants. She will help develop requests for proposals, review applications, recommend funding and evaluate the progress of grant projects. Larson will also collaborate closely with the organization’s communications team to disseminate research findings and empower people who smoke to find cessation solutions that work for them.
“I’m excited to start the next chapter of my public health career, helping people live their longest and healthiest lives through empowered behavior change,” said Larson in a statement.
Larson brings two decades of experience in public health, behavior change and risk reduction. She began by working in HIV prevention through needle exchange programs and other community-based interventions. She led the HIV prevention program for the Rhode Island Department of Health before transitioning to the state’s tobacco control program. She later served as a senior regulatory scientist in evaluating the potential impact of reduced-risk nicotine products on adult smoking behavior and cessation.
She will report to Erik Augustson, vice president of programs.
“It’s a pleasure to bring Elsa on board. She will enhance our ability to accelerate rigorous science in support of ending the global smoking epidemic,” said Augustson.
Larson earned her M.A. and Ph.D. in behavioral science (health psychology) and an M.S. in pharmacoepidemiology from the University of Rhode Island.

April 30, 2024