On 25 February, an international expert seminar was organised by the ENSP and National Tobacco and Alcohol Control Coalition (NTAKK) in the Lithuanian Parliament in Vilnius. With the presence of Minister of Health Prof. Aurelijus Veriga and participation  of national officials, international experts, representatives of NGOs, legal changes imposed by novel products were discussed.

Information on legal instruments as well as experience from countries such as Italy, Spain, Poland, Greece, the United Kingdom and France have been provided. Many experts have noted that Lithuania is an example of good practice, being among the first countries in the EU to implement the tobacco products directive adopted in 2014. To build on that success, is was very important to clarify that heated tobacco products are not proven to pose lower risk for its users and should be a subject to strict regulation. 

They also focus on promotion of comprehensive social transformation, which is necessary for the elimination of health-threatening forces and relations and, to that end, the Institute conducts multidisciplinary advocacy work.

Learn more about the Health Association Institute [TR]...

Who can be nominated? How to submit a nomination?

Read more...

Please note that the deadline for submission of nominations is Friday, 8 March 2019 - 17:00 (GMT).

The deadline for submission is 15 March 2019!
Please note that applications are to be submitted electronically.

Francisco Rodriguez Lozano, President of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP), offered some introductory remarks. He welcomed everyone to what he hoped would be a fruitful discussion, and he thanked MEP Bușoi for the organisation of the event. Price, he highlighted, was one of the most effective measures of tobacco control. 

The Director of Smoke Free Partnership, Anca Toma Friedlaender, also offered some opening remarks. She thanked for the invitation to the event, and for being allocated time to intervene. Smoke Free Partnership is a partnership of the Belgian Foundation against cancer, Cancer Research UK, the Dutch Cancer Society and the Norwegian Cancer Society with the European Heart Network, Action on Smoking and Health (UK), and La Ligue contre le Cancer, she explained. They coordinate a coalition of 45 organisations all over Europe to advocate for the implementation of the illicit trade protocol. The points that she will be presented have also been endorsed by the European Cancer League, she noted.

The main pannels of discussion were: Legal framework adopted under the TPD and its derived acts, Article 7 and 8 of the WHO-FCTC illicit trade protocol, Illicit tobacco trade, Tobacco control research and  The legal framework adopted by the European Commission vs. the WHO protocol.

Increasing taxes on tobacco is essential for global health for reducing consumption, reducing the affordability, poverty and at the same time for saving millions of lives. But with higher taxes, increase much more smuggling and many new brands come onto the market to keep alive the interest of the low-income population.

Read the full report...

On Friday March 1, 2019, a unanimous Quebec Court of Appeal with a panel of 5 justices (5-0) dealt the tobacco industry a massive defeat in the two tobacco class actions.  In a compelling 422-page judgment, the Quebec Court of Appeal upheld a May 27, 2015 trial judgment of the Quebec Superior Court.  At trial, the Superior Court had found the 3 major tobacco companies in Canada (which are 100% subsidiaries of BAT, PMI and JTI) liable for $C15.5 billion in damages (US$11.7 billion at current exchange rates).  The total liability has now climbed to about C$17 billion (US$12.8 billion) given accumulating interest.

 

The tobacco industry has indicated that it will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.  A decision as to whether or not the Supreme Court of Canada will grant permission to appeal would be made in about 6 months.

Learn more about the historical chronology of the case...

In order to be able to appeal to the Quebec Court of Appeal, two of the tobacco companies had to pay a total C$984 million into court, funds to be available to the plaintiffs should the tobacco companies lose the appeal.

 

Read the full Quebec Court of Appeal March 1, 2019 judgment (French)...

 

Read the English summary here...

In June 2014, Swedish Match originally submitted a Modified Risk Tobacco Product Application (MRTPA) to permit it to market eight sub-brands of General Snus with warning label statements different from those required by law for other commercially marketed smokeless tobacco products. The application aimed at leading smokers who would not otherwise quit smoking to switch completely to a Swedish match snus product, and would not lead to dual use or significant use among youth.

Two years later, the FDA denied Swedish Match’s request to remove a currently required warning stating that the products can cause gum disease and tooth loss, and deferred final action on the company’s other requests to remove or revise two additional currently required warnings. It was determined that the MRTPAs did not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that, as actually used by consumers, the snus products sold with modified risk claims would significantly reduce harm and the risk of tobacco-related disease to individual tobacco users and benefit the health of the population as a whole.

After 2 more years, in September 2018, Swedish Match submitted an amendment in response to the three deficiencies enumerated in FDA’s December 2016 letter, and submitted a second amendment in November 2018 in response to FDA’s October 2018 Advice and Information Request Letter. Regarding the first two deficiencies, the company’s September 2018 amendment accepted FDA’s recommendations to retain the warnings stating that the product “can cause mouth cancer” and “is not a safe alternative to cigarettes.” In response to the third deficiency, Swedish Match conducted a new consumer perception study entitled “Perceptions and Behavioral Intentions Study” to address the issues with its previous consumer perception study that the FDA identified. Based on the results of this study and other research, Swedish Match proposed the modified risk claim for the General Snus. 

Read more about the requirements for a MRTP order...

The main goal is to consistently limit access to tobacco products, to reduce the negative effects of smoking on health of people and to envisage legislative regulation of production, sale and use of electronic smoking systems, and also heated tobacco products.

Read more...

Vinčiūnas confirmed once again the Commission’s opposition to consider novel tobacco products and e-cigarettes as healthy saying that  “There are scientific reports saying that e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes (...) but it’s still tobacco". " You can drink less poison, but it is still poison in the end,” he added.

Read more...

Abstract

Read the full article here...

What are the effects of using e-cigarettes for a long period of time? The dangers seem to be almost the same for e-cigarettes smokers or dual smokers. Despite the illusion of smokers, the harm wasn't reduced and the long-lasting effects on the health are still very significant. This paper explains the case and provides the conclusion after a four-year study.

OBJECTIVE: More than a decade after e-cigarette (e-cig) market launch, limited information are available on their safety after 24 months of use. In 2013, we started the first observational study assessing e-cig long-term effectiveness and safety, directly comparing tobacco smokers and e-cig users. Here we report the results after four years of follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults (30-75 years) were included if: smokers of ≥1 tobacco cigarette/day (tobacco smokers); users of any type of e-cig inhaling ≥50 puffs weekly (e-cig users); users of both tobacco and e-cig (dual users). Data were collected by phone and/or internet, and carbon monoxide levels tested in 50% of those declaring tobacco abstinence. Main outcomes were: possibly smoking-related diseases (PSRD; validated through hospital discharge data or visit in 62.6% of the sample); 4-year tobacco abstinence; number of tobacco cigarettes/day.

RESULTS: Data were available for 228 e-cig users (all ex-smokers), 471 tobacco smokers, 216 dual users. A PSRD was observed in 73 subjects (8.0%). No differences emerged across groups in PSRD rates, with negligible variations in self-reported health. Of e-cig users, 63.6% remained tobacco abstinent; dual users and tobacco smokers showed non-significantly different rates of tobacco (33.8% vs. 26.8%) and all-product (20.2% vs. 19.4%) cessation, and a similar decrease in cigarettes/day. Almost 40% of the sample switched at least once (tobacco smokers: 17.2%; dual users: 81.9%).

CONCLUSIONS: After four years, a scarce, non-significant harm reduction was observed among e-cig or dual users. Given the long-lasting health effects of tobacco smoking, the benefits of e-cig use may start being detectable at the next follow-up (six years). The complete switch to e-cig may help tobacco quitters remain abstinent, but e-cig use in addition to tobacco did not increase the likelihood of smoking cessation or reduction.

Read the full paper...