With simply 100 days remaining earlier than the World Well being Group’s (WHO) subsequent international tobacco management summit, issues are mounting that COP11 will as soon as once more sideline science, shut out key voices, and push an abstinence-only agenda that ignores the realities of smoking cessation. For these dedicated to hurt discount, the draft agenda reads much less like a roadmap for public well being progress and extra like a fastidiously scripted effort to shut ranks, management the narrative, and hold essentially the most related stakeholders out of the room.
Discrediting and dismissing hurt discount
In actual fact, the preliminary agenda for COP11 reveals a deliberate rejection of hurt discount as a reputable public well being technique. As an alternative of acknowledging the rising physique of proof displaying that safer nicotine merchandise save lives, the WHO and its Framework Conference on Tobacco Management (FCTC) Secretariat have chosen to painting hurt discount as nothing greater than a speaking level of the tobacco business. The selection to wrap the time period “hurt discount” in citation marks speaks volumes—it’s a linguistic sleight of hand that casts doubt on the idea earlier than any dialogue even begins.
Much more telling is the authorized framework the agenda invokes. It cites Article 5.2(b) of the FCTC as the premise for its strategy, even though this text accommodates no reference to hurt discount in any respect. In contrast, Article 1(d) explicitly lists hurt discount as one of many three pillars of tobacco management, alongside lowering provide and demand. Its omission can’t be dismissed as an oversight—it seems to be a calculated transfer to slim the scope of dialogue and sidestep acknowledging hurt discount as a core factor of tobacco management.
Silenced voices, misplaced lives
Proposals from member states that sought to place hurt discount firmly on the desk—comparable to a request from Saint Kitts and Nevis to ascertain a working group—have been utterly excluded from the agenda.
This restrictive stance has tangible penalties. Proposals from member states that sought to place hurt discount firmly on the desk—comparable to a request from Saint Kitts and Nevis to ascertain a working group—have been utterly excluded from the agenda. This follows a well-recognized sample. At COP10, a number of international locations together with New Zealand, the Philippines, Guyana, and Armenia made sturdy, evidence-based interventions in assist of options to smoking. But, as a substitute of honoring these calls, the COP11 agenda frames hurt discount as a risk relatively than a chance, making certain that these voices aren’t solely ignored however successfully erased from the dialog.
The omission is especially putting when one considers the wealth of real-world proof obtainable in favour of hurt discount. Sweden has pushed its smoking fee right down to under 6%—the bottom within the EU—largely by the provision of reduced-risk merchandise comparable to snus and nicotine pouches. The UK has reached record-low smoking charges by integrating vaping into its cessation technique. New Zealand, notably certainly one of COP10’s unheard voices, is properly on its was of assembly its Smokefree 2025 purpose, by endorsing vapes and different options for smoking cessation. Japan has halved cigarette gross sales in simply eight years, by permitting heated tobacco merchandise to compete with cigarettes. These successes all level in the identical course: when safer nicotine choices are accessible, smoking declines quickly.
And but, the WHO exhibits little inclination to observe this proof. As an alternative of studying from these success tales, it seems dedicated to an ideological, prohibitionist path, usually formed behind closed doorways with the affect of billionaire-funded lobbying from figures comparable to Michael Bloomberg. In gentle of this, nobody was surpirsed when lately the WHO counseled Thailand’s vape ban – a measure which ignores proof that prohibition fails to curb vaping or smoking and as a substitute fuels black markets, whereas ignoring knowledge indictating that speedy smoking declines within the afore talked about international locations, distinction sharply with Thailand’s gradual progress.
Shutting out vital stakeholders and options
The closed nature of COP conferences has been extensively criticized in previous protection. Journalists, impartial researchers, public well being consultants who assist hurt discount, and—maybe most significantly—shoppers themselves are routinely denied entry. Those that have lived expertise of quitting smoking by vaping, nicotine pouches, or heated tobacco merchandise are excluded from discussions that straight have an effect on their lives.
Such secrecy not solely undermines transparency but additionally prevents growing nations from crafting insurance policies suited to their particular circumstances. With out inclusive debate, choices threat being imposed from the highest down, formed by political agendas relatively than public well being wants. The method turns into much less about saving lives and extra about preserving the established order.
The World Vapers’ Alliance (WVA) is highlighting that COP11 will simply be referred to as one other public well being catastrophe if its course just isn’t corrected. In a newly launched paper, the group factors to the putting success of nations which have embraced hurt discount. They argue that people who smoke worldwide deserve the identical entry to efficient options—not an all-or-nothing alternative dictated by ideology. The alliance is urging nationwide delegations to talk out at COP11, to problem the WHO’s framing, and to demand transparency, inclusion, and evidence-led policymaking.
The harmful course of world tobacco management
The stakes couldn’t be any greater. Smoking stays one of many main preventable causes of dying worldwide, and the clock is ticking. Hurt discount just isn’t a theoretical idea—it’s a confirmed technique that has already helped tens of millions give up smoking. By refusing to present it a good listening to, COP11 is locking in outdated insurance policies and delaying the decline in smoking-related illness and dying for years to come back.
For hurt discount advocates, the trail ahead is obvious. COP11 should open its doorways—actually and figuratively—to those that have the proof, the experience, and the lived expertise to form efficient coverage. The dearth of that is leading to a victory for ideology over science, and the associated fee may be measured in lives misplaced. The world can’t afford one other closed-door summit that pretends progress is being made whereas ignoring the options which might be already working. But, seems like that’s precisely what is about to occur this yr – as in yearly prior!
The Actual Motive Why FCTC COP10 Was Postponed?
