The public understands that bans will not reduce the use of harmful habits or addictive substances. Support for harm reduction initiatives, switching to smoke free alternatives and differentiated tax policies – depending on the harmfulness of products, has been observed- such was a conclusion by experts at the seminar “Prohibition is not regulation!”
Bans on the use of harmful substances have never justified themselves and are eventually repealed as ineffective. Therefore, more and more countries are leaning towards harm reduction policies that take into account the reality that there will always be people who, despite any restrictions and bans, continue their harmful habits. Bans do not reduce the use of harmful substances; they only change market behaviors, and not necessarily for the better. From a public health perspective, it is much more useful to promote the legal purchase options of less harmful alternatives.
In a 2023 study by research centre SKDS ” Public attitudes towards tobacco and nicotine products and their use” , 48 % of the respondents said that one way to reduce the harm caused by cigarette smoke to the society is to encourage smokers to completely switch to smoke-free alternatives.
Meanwhile, 46% of respondents agree that smoke-free products should be subject to a lower excise tax than cigarettes, but at the same time these taxes should be sufficiently high to discourage young people and non-smokers from starting to use these products.
The survey also asked the public how they assess the upcoming plan to ban the sale of e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches with different flavors in Latvia, as well as to set such low nicotine concentration for nicotine pouches that would make them uninteresting to users. 47% of respondents indicated that people would buy these products illegally online, from abroad, or from illegal distributors. 31% believed that users would switch or continue using cigarettes and other tobacco products. Only 6% acknowledged that users might quit using these products and also not start smoking cigarettes or other tobacco products.
SKDS Director Arnis Kaktiņš, presenting the survey results, acknowledged that in the eyes of the public, these planned flavor bans are complete nonsense, and society does not believe in the necessity and effectiveness of such a policy. Arnis Kaktiņš emphasized, “This is yet another small brick that undermines trust in the government, which makes itself ridiculous with such decisions. Those in power demonstrate their incompetence, their lack of listening to experts and public opinion. As a result, inadequate decisions are made. In a way, we can compare this with the North Korean approach, where decisions are made without regard to public opinion, and there is a desire to achieve complete control over society through various restrictions.”
The survey also shows that 35% of the population in Latvia uses tobacco and nicotine-containing products, of which 29% are using them regularly, while 6% are using them only occasionally. The typical smoker in Latvia is still a user of traditional cigarettes – about two thirds of all users of tobacco and nicotine products smoke cigarettes. Meanwhile, the number of new users of tobacco and nicotine products is relatively small
The study also indicates that younger users of tobacco and nicotine products tend to purchase them more frequently outside the regular retail locations or specialized stores, often acquiring them from friends and acquaintances. This suggests that in the case of bans and restrictions, it may be relatively easy to find ways to obtain these products.
Professor Lars E. Rutqvist, an internationally recognized researcher, medical doctor and scientific consultant on oncology, discussed Sweden’s experience in smoking reduction, emphasizing that the positive and rational incentives have a much better impact on society than strict bans and restrictions. The number of cigarette smokers in Sweden has now decreased to almost 5%, which allows it to be considered a smoke-free society. This has been achieved by alternative products (snus or chewing tobacco), which present a significantly lower health risk, as evidenced by the lowest smoking-related disease rates in Europe.
Interestingly, the transition to snus in Sweden was not a government initiative but a choice of people themselves in favor of a less harmful nicotine product. Initially, the government classified snus as a typical tobacco product, but upon seeing its positive impact on public health, the state policy was completely revised. In 2024, Sweden plans to reduce taxes on snus and on nicotine pouches – the tobacco free type of snus. Lars E. Rutqvist explains that a rational regulatory approach based on research and practical results means that taxes should be applied according to the harm of the product. The more harmful the product, the higher the taxes should be, emphasizes the professor.
Sociologist and addiction researcher Kristiāna Diāna Deivisa also emphasizes that countries with the strictest drug prohibition policies do not succeed in achieving lower levels of drug use compared to countries that implement evidence-based policies. Bans do not reduce the use of banned substances but merely transform the market. Moreover, it has been observed that stricter restrictions and more active law enforcement efforts against them can lead to a significant escalation of violence in society.
Presentations:
