As Europe prepares for COP11, leaked documents reveal a troubling shift: policymakers plan to ban safer nicotine alternatives—ignoring proven harm reduction science.
A leaked European Union draft has once again ignited a fierce debate across the harm reduction community, revealing plans that could upend years of progress toward a smoke-free future. Dated 7 October 2025, the confidential document outlines the EU’s proposed position for the upcoming WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) meeting in Geneva. And its contents have alarmed scientists, consumers, and policymakers alike.
The draft suggests that Brussels intends to classify all non-combustible nicotine products—vapes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches—under the same public health framework as combustible cigarettes. If implemented, this move would effectively erase distinctions between high- and low-risk products, threatening the very foundation of tobacco harm reduction.
In the document, these newer nicotine alternatives are framed not as tools for reducing harm, but as “gateways” to addiction. The EU’s position calls for heavy restrictions on marketing, flavours, and sales, alongside the possible prohibition of entire product categories. Ironically, while these measures target smoke-free products, traditional cigarettes—the primary source of tobacco-related death and disease—would remain largely untouched.
Banning the cure, protecting the disease
Public health experts warn that such an approach risks backfiring spectacularly, insisting that if you remove safer options while leaving deadly ones on the shelf, you’re not protecting health—you’re protecting the cigarette trade. The fear among many is that by rejecting science-led harm reduction, the EU could stall, or even reverse, its own progress on smoking-related mortality.
To add insult to injury, the draft also dismisses harm reduction as an “industry tactic,” ignoring the mounting body of independent evidence supporting reduced-risk products. Countries like Sweden and Japan have demonstrated that offering safer alternatives can dramatically cut smoking prevalence and save lives. Sweden’s success is particularly striking: smoking has fallen to just 5.4%—the lowest rate in the EU—accompanied by lung cancer rates more than 40% below the European average.
Sweden pushes back yet again
In fact, Sweden’s government has now taken the bold step of formally challenging bans on nicotine pouches in several EU member states, including France and Spain. Stockholm argues that such restrictions violate the EU’s single market principles and disregard the proven public health benefits of smokeless nicotine. When Sweden joined the EU in 1995, it secured an exemption to continue selling snus domestically—a product widely credited with helping the nation achieve near smoke-free status.
Nicotine pouches, which contain nicotine but no tobacco, have gained rapid popularity since 2014, particularly among younger adults seeking alternatives to smoking or vaping. Yet several EU countries have imposed total bans, often under the guise of youth protection. Sweden’s foreign ministry recently issued letters to France and Spain warning that such prohibitions “undermine evidence-based public health and the free movement of goods.”
Analysts suggest that mounting national bans could pave the way for an EU-wide prohibition when the bloc revises its Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). The leaked draft also reveals that the EU’s FCTC delegation plans to support similar restrictions—or outright bans—at the global level during the Geneva meeting.
From science to stigma
Clive Bates, Director of Counterfactual and one of the world’s most vocal advocates for evidence-based harm reduction, criticised this policy direction at last month’s Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum (GTNF) in Brussels. He argued that global tobacco control frameworks, including the FCTC, have failed to adapt to modern science and innovation. “Smoking remains the leading cause of preventable death worldwide, yet our policies are stuck in the past,” Bates said. “We’re treating safer products as the problem when they are, in fact, the solution.”
Bates discussed how global smoking prevalence has declined but the absolute number of smokers remains static due to population growth—proof, he highlighted, that traditional tobacco control strategies have plateaued. He reiterated that Sweden, Japan, and the UK are models for integrating safer nicotine alternatives into public health strategies, noting that where consumers have access to smoke-free products, smoking-related disease declines rapidly.
Bates also criticised the WHO’s entrenched hostility toward harm reduction, arguing that its refusal to engage with industry or consumer voices has led to “ideological blindness.” By treating all nicotine as equally dangerous, he said, the FCTC risks undermining public trust and preventing millions of smokers from switching to far safer options.
Ideology vs. evidence-based harm reduction
The EU’s leaked plan has therefore been interpreted by many as a step backward—one that could entrench smoking rather than eliminate it. Studies consistently show that vaping and oral nicotine products are at least 90–95% less harmful than smoking, yet the new draft rejects this risk continuum outright.
As the FCTC meeting approaches, public health advocates across Europe are urging policymakers to rethink tobacco control stratregies based on prohibition. The evidence from Sweden is clear: when adult smokers are empowered to switch to safer products, smoking rates collapse, and lives are saved.
If Europe truly wants to achieve a smoke-free future, it must choose science over stigma—regulation over prohibition—and harm reduction over ideology. Otherwise, it risks locking millions of Europeans into a preventable cycle of disease, driven not by choice, but by policy.