Surjit Singh Flora
The emissions produced by your vehicle are linked to cancer risk. Overindulging to the point of obesity can lead to the development of diabetes. Consuming alcohol can lead to severe liver damage. Consumption of cold cuts may lead to cancer due to the presence of nitrites. Gambling has the potential to ruin lives and fracture families. The enumeration continues indefinitely. Which option aligns with your interests? Which of these “deadly sins” will you staunchly advocate for as a matter of personal liberty due to its impact on your life? Nutrition? Alcohol? Cannabis? Firearms?
The prevalence of tobacco smoking in India is notably high. Both genders engage in smoking. In the local context, individuals partake in the consumption of a bidi, a cigarette crafted from tobacco and encased in Tendu leaves. In certain locations, even children engage in smoking. The situation is quite disorganized. Currently, there are no ongoing initiatives by the government aimed at discouraging smoking or drinking behaviours.
Despite the prohibition of smoking Hukka in public areas. While public smoking has been prohibited in certain areas, the enforcement of this ban is lacking. There appears to be a general indifference, and individuals engage in smoking without restraint.
In the past five to six years, the government has implemented additional taxation on cigarettes, resulting in a significant increase in their cost. It remains unclear whether the intention is to deter smoking or merely to profit from individuals who continue to engage in this harmful habit.
Approximately 275 million individuals in India engage in tobacco use. Among this demographic, there are 164 million individuals who exclusively utilize smokeless tobacco, 69 million who solely engage in smoking tobacco, and 42 million who partake in both forms of tobacco consumption. Estimates suggest that tobacco consumption in India accounts for over one million deaths annually.
Tobacco results in the premature death of 50% of its users. In India, approximately 3,600 individuals succumb daily as a result of tobacco consumption.
The tobacco industry is focusing on the younger generation to secure replacement consumers and ensure a continuous stream of profits.
“The sector employs polished promotional strategies utilizing contemporary media instruments and seemingly innocuous products aimed at attracting the youth, thereby fostering a fresh surge of dependency.”
The tobacco industry promotes tobacco and nicotine products as innovative and less harmful items, akin to gadgets or toys, presented in appealing packaging. Evidence indicates that products marketed in fruit and candy flavours, heavily promoted on social media platforms, are captivating young individuals globally.
The presence of nicotine in tobacco contributes significantly to its addictive nature, making tobacco use a substantial risk factor for various health issues, including cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, over 20 distinct types of cancer, and numerous other serious health conditions. Tobacco and nicotine products, regardless of their form, are highly addictive and are linked to various diseases and mortality.
A correlation exists between tobacco use and elevated mortality rates among adults, especially in low and moderate-income countries, which frequently bear the greatest burden of tobacco-related illness and death. The consumption of tobacco leads to the demise of over one million individuals in India annually, representing 9.5% of the overall mortality rate in the nation.
A recent poll conducted in 2024 indicates that the prevalence of smoking among males remains notably high, at approximately twenty percent. Despite ongoing efforts to enhance public health, advancements remain slow, and time is not in our favour in this regard.
Given this context, it is understandable that I am quite concerned about the ongoing discourse in India regarding alternative nicotine products. Unfortunately, the chance to significantly improve the health of our nation is being clouded by ideological claims and assertions rooted in misinformation.
Recently, various politicians, notably the PS for Public Health, have rejected alternative nicotine products. These assertions fail to acknowledge an expanding collection of scientific evidence that has received endorsement from global authorities. It is essential to highlight that these products have received endorsement from esteemed regulatory and health organizations, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States, precisely because they present a significantly lower risk to health in comparison to traditional cigarettes. While I understand the allure of a sensational title, it is essential that we focus on the facts at hand.
Various global entities, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Health Security Agency of the United Kingdom, and political figures in Sweden, New Zealand, and Japan, have acknowledged that alternative nicotine products, including vapes and nicotine pouches, pose significantly lower risks compared to conventional cigarettes. Following an extensive review of the scientific literature, these authorities have determined that the utilization of these products leads to a decreased risk of cancer, heart disease, and various other health issues associated with smoking.
Earlier this month, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), one of the most significant and rigorous regulatory agencies globally, made a landmark decision by declaring nicotine pouches to be “appropriate for the protection of public health.” The significance that this contributes to the concept of tobacco harm reduction is substantial, and it is fitting to acknowledge and replicate this notion.
Similarly, Sweden, known for its innovative harm reduction strategies, boasts the lowest smoking rates in Europe, accompanied by a corresponding decline in smoking-related fatalities. During this period, New Zealand has achieved a remarkable fifty percent reduction in the number of smokers within just five years, largely due to the broad acceptance of alternative nicotine products. Furthermore, the British government has consistently supported the promotion of electronic cigarettes as a method for smoking cessation, highlighting their reduced risks compared to conventional cigarettes and their advantages for individuals seeking to quit smoking.
India stands at a pivotal moment, poised to make a decision that will be remembered for generations. According to research conducted by experts in tobacco harm reduction, if policymakers in India were to incorporate harm reduction strategies into public health policy, it could potentially save more than half of the lives lost annually due to smoking by the year 2060. The findings stem from comprehensive research carried out by leading experts globally, who concluded that transitioning from cigarettes to vapes and nicotine pouches will markedly decrease smoking-related fatalities.
What is causing us to hesitate? The unfortunate reality is that disinformation, particularly that disseminated by the State Department of Public Health and Professional Standards, breeds confusion. The approach fails to align with established scientific consensus principles. This course will not provide any support to the one in five males in India who are already smokers, nor to the 253 million Indians who die each year from smoking-related diseases. In our discourse on strategies to preserve the lives of individuals in India, it is crucial to remember that these individuals are our neighbours, friends, and family; they are people whose futures hinge on the policy decisions we implement today. Should we opt to overlook the scientific evidence that is clearly presented, it is imperative that we do not impose unnecessary suffering upon them.
These established methods have proven effective in various other situations. Should we attempt to develop something entirely original?
(The author is veteran journalist and freelance writer based in Brampton)