Stories

The government plans to amend the anti-tobacco ordinance by lifting the ban on e-cigarettes, sparking concerns about public health and youth. The decision follows a recommendation from a special committee reviewing ordinances. Anti-tobacco advocates warn that e-cigarettes are harmful, with 30 countries having banned them. Health experts and campaigners stress the importance of protecting youths and urge the government to reconsider the move. The amendments will also eliminate restrictions on displaying tobacco products at sales points. The ordinance aims to control tobacco use and includes penalties for violation. Public health advocates emphasize the need to maintain restrictions on e-cigarettes and tobacco products to safeguard the population.

The UK Parliament has moved a step closer to finalising the Tobacco and Vapes Bill after accepting amendments introduced by the House of Lords. The changes focus largely on strengthening enforcement mechanisms and refining how the legislation will be implemented in practice. Key provisions include adjustments to areas such as age verification requirements and regulatory oversight, reflecting recommendations from parliamentary committees and ongoing consultations. The acceptance of these amendments signals broad political support for tightening controls on tobacco and vaping products, particularly in response to concerns about youth uptake. At the same time, debate continues over the potential impact of the measures on adult smokers and the role of harm reduction.

Singapore has implemented stringent laws against vaping, leading with severe penalties including long prison sentences and caning. The new Tobacco and Vaporisers Control Act broadens the ban on vapes, penalizing possession, sale, and smuggling. The legislation includes harsh punishments for devices containing specified substances. Penalties for personal possession and selling vapes have significantly increased. Advocates fear a spread of prohibition policies in the region. Despite evidence supporting vaping as a smoking cessation tool, Singapore maintains strict regulations. Critics argue that such measures are totalitarian and disregard scientific research, potentially impacting public health negatively.

A campaign has been launched opposing a proposed public vaping ban, with supporters encouraged to take part in a government consultation and contact their Members of Parliament. The initiative highlights concerns that the proposed restrictions are not sufficiently supported by evidence of public health benefit, particularly regarding exposure risks to bystanders. It also emphasises the importance of incorporating real-world experiences into policymaking processes, especially from individuals who have used vaping as a tool to quit smoking. The campaign argues that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and suggests that overly broad restrictions could undermine harm reduction efforts. Public participation is being encouraged through submissions to the consultation process and the sharing of personal testimonies.

A significant policy shift in Oklahoma is allowing prisoners to access nicotine vapes and pouches through prison commissaries, marking a notable development in harm reduction approaches within correctional systems. Smoking rates among incarcerated populations remain exceptionally high, while traditional tobacco bans have often fuelled illicit trade, debt and violence inside prisons. Officials argue that providing regulated access to lower-risk nicotine alternatives could reduce contraband markets and improve safety conditions. The move reflects a broader debate about whether harm reduction strategies should play a greater role in institutional settings, particularly where complete abstinence policies have proven difficult to enforce.

Growing attention is being given to a major systematic review assessing the effectiveness of e-cigarettes in helping smokers quit. Expert reactions highlight that the findings are consistent with earlier high-quality evidence, suggesting that nicotine e-cigarettes can be an effective cessation tool. Despite this, some scientists point out that these results are still not fully reflected in public health debates, where scepticism towards vaping remains widespread. The discussion underscores a broader disconnect between emerging scientific evidence and how it is interpreted or communicated in policy and public discourse. At its core, the issue raises questions about whether current perceptions of vaping align with the weight of existing research.

Public opinion in New York is showing clear resistance to proposed new taxes on nicotine pouches, highlighting growing tensions around how alternative nicotine products should be regulated. A plan put forward by Governor Kathy Hochul would apply the same high tax rate to nicotine pouches as to cigarettes, despite differences in how these products are used and perceived. Polling data suggests that less than half of New York voters support the measure, with a significant share favouring lower taxation for these products. The proposal has sparked a broader debate about whether treating lower-risk alternatives the same as combustible tobacco could discourage smokers from switching. At the centre of the discussion is how taxation policy can balance public health goals, consumer behaviour, and harm reduction strategies in an evolving nicotine market.

Growing concern is being voiced by some researchers that the European Union’s approach to vaping may be moving away from scientific evidence and real-world outcomes. A leading expert in tobacco harm reduction warns that stricter regulations and higher taxes on nicotine alternatives could risk reversing progress in reducing smoking rates. Criticism focuses on what is seen as a failure to properly distinguish between combustible cigarettes and lower-risk alternatives such as e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches. Examples such as Sweden are frequently highlighted, where widespread adoption of harm reduction products has contributed to some of the lowest smoking rates in Europe. There are also concerns that restrictive policies could unintentionally drive consumers back to smoking or toward illicit markets if safer alternatives become less accessible or more expensive. The debate ultimately reflects a broader clash between precautionary regulation and evidence-based public health strategies in shaping the future of nicotine policy across the EU.

North Macedonia is intensifying oversight of its medical cannabis sector after uncovering widespread irregularities among licensed producers. Authorities have revoked additional licences from several companies following inspections that identified legal and operational breaches. The move follows earlier enforcement actions and large-scale seizures of cannabis allegedly diverted from legal production into illicit markets. Officials have announced broader inspections across the entire industry, signalling concerns about systemic weaknesses in regulatory control. The developments highlight growing pressure to tighten governance and ensure transparency in a rapidly expanding medical cannabis market.

Growing scrutiny is being placed on how conflicts of interest are defined and managed within public policy, research, and advocacy. Concerns are emerging that current frameworks may be too narrow, overlooking indirect influences such as funding sources, institutional ties, and ideological alignment. Critics argue that this lack of clarity can distort policy debates and undermine trust in decision-making processes. The discussion calls for a broader and more transparent approach to identifying potential biases, particularly in areas where science, regulation, and public interest intersect. At its core, the issue raises fundamental questions about accountability, credibility, and the integrity of evidence used to shape policy.