Read articles from Global

September 18, 2026 by gfn.tv

Moral panic makes nicotine policy louder but not smarter. It pushes debate towards fear, urgency and symbolic restriction, while the harder questions about smoking, relative risk and consumer behaviour get pushed aside. The result can be regulation that feels protective but leaves adult smokers with fewer credible routes away from cigarettes. Public health needs evidence, proportion and calm enough to tell the difference between a real risk and a politically useful alarm.

September 16, 2026 by github.io

Taiwan’s nicotine policy draws a stark line in the wrong place: cigarettes remain legal while vapes are banned. That leaves adult smokers with fewer lower-risk options and keeps combustible tobacco as the most familiar legal choice. A health-focused framework should distinguish between products that burn tobacco and products that can reduce exposure by removing combustion. Public health policy should make the safer route easier to take, not harder to reach.

September 15, 2026 by liberalism.org

Illicit tobacco is what happens after policy stops accounting for demand. High taxes, restricted safer alternatives and confidence in top-down control can turn nicotine into a market run less by retailers and more by criminal networks. That weakens age checks, product standards and public oversight while keeping cigarettes cheap for those willing to buy outside the law. The lesson is uncomfortable but clear: reducing harm requires legal pathways that work better than the illicit ones.

September 14, 2026 by gfn.tv

Harm reduction feels different for smokers because tobacco control has often treated nicotine use as a moral problem rather than a risk continuum. People who smoke need realistic ways to reduce exposure to the harms of combustion, especially after repeated quit attempts. Safer nicotine products do not remove every risk, but they can change the scale of harm dramatically. Public health should meet smokers with practical options, not only expectations of abstinence.

September 11, 2026 by abc.net.au

Labor is cracking down on the illicit tobacco trade with new offences targeting organised crime, distributors and retailers selling illegal cigarettes.

The changes would also make it easier to seize the profits and assets of criminals involved in the black market.

September 11, 2026 by eichor.com

This multi-site clinical trial will generate data on the efficacy of tirzepatide for smoking cessation and associated outcomes (e.g., post-cessation weight gain) in treatment-seeking people who smoke (PWS) with overweight or obesity. A sample of (...)

September 08, 2026 by github.io

The contrast between cannabis liberalisation and nicotine restriction reveals a deep regulatory inconsistency. Governments increasingly defend adult autonomy for cannabis while criminalising non-combustible nicotine products that can move smokers away from cigarettes. That double standard is hard to justify on harm reduction grounds, especially when combustion drives so much of the risk in both markets. Policy should be based on exposure, evidence and real-world outcomes — not on which substance happens to be more politically acceptable.

September 08, 2026 by github.io

The contrast between cannabis liberalisation and nicotine restriction reveals a deep regulatory inconsistency. Governments increasingly defend adult autonomy for cannabis while criminalising non-combustible nicotine products that can move smokers away from cigarettes. That double standard is hard to justify on harm reduction grounds, especially when combustion drives so much of the risk in both markets. Policy should be based on exposure, evidence and real-world outcomes — not on which substance happens to be more politically acceptable.

September 07, 2026 by substack.com

Dismissing harm reduction as “tobacco defence” is an easy way to avoid the harder question: what actually helps smokers leave cigarettes behind? Industry scrutiny remains necessary, but it cannot replace evidence on combustion, switching and relative risk. A debate that treats every safer nicotine product as a corporate trick leaves no room for consumer experience or measurable reductions in harm. Public health should be able to challenge tobacco companies without dismissing the tools that may make cigarettes less dominant.

September 04, 2026 by gfn.tv

“They don’t count” captures one of the deepest failures in nicotine policy. Smokers, vapers and users of safer nicotine products are often treated as statistics, problems or collateral damage rather than people whose choices determine whether harm is reduced in practice. A global war on nicotine can lose sight of the real target: disease and death caused by smoking. Public health should count the people it claims to protect, especially those trying to move away from combustion.