There’s a noticeable rift brewing in European public health policy lately. The big question on everyone’s mind is why regulators keep striving to wipe out nicotine use entirely, rather than focus on cutting smoking rates by nudging smokers toward safer nicotine alternatives – a strategy which has ultimately been proven to work. History has shown that prohibition-based nicotine policies (such as restricting access to said products, banning flavours, or limiting how effective products can be) end up helping the very cigarette market lawmakers claim they are trying to get rid of.
For example, in the Netherlands, lawmakers are looking to bump up the legal age for buying any nicotine products, including vapes, from 18 to 21. This move is part of a bigger plan to create a “smoke-free generation,” especially after concerns about younger teens experimenting with vaping. Yet local data have clearly shown that previous restrictions on safer alternatives have been counterproductive.
Supporters of restrictive policies insist they will help keep nicotine products out of the hands of young people. On the flip side, critics argue that young adults aged 18 to 20 already have many responsibilities—they vote, work, serve in the military, and make their own health choices. They wonder if raising the age limit will really make a difference in how many young people start smoking, and believe it will likely just lead to more cross-border buying and black market sales. More importantly, harm reduction advocates argue that policymakers are losing sight of the primary public health objective: helping existing smokers quit combustible cigarettes.
Portugal targets nicotine pouches
Portugal has become the latest battleground in Europe’s nicotine debate after approving plans to impose extensive restrictions on nicotine pouches. The proposed measures include flavour bans, online sales restrictions, and undefined future nicotine limits. Consumer groups and harm reduction advocates warn the proposals treat smoke-free nicotine products as if they carry risks comparable to smoking, conflicting with a growing body of scientific evidence suggesting nicotine pouches are substantially less harmful than cigarettes.
Researchers from institutions including University College London and the University of East Anglia have repeatedly highlighted the reduced-risk profile of oral nicotine products. Former WHO officials writing in Nature Health recently argued that smoke-free alternatives could play a critical role if countries hope to reduce smoking prevalence to below 5% by 2040. THR experts have consistently highlighted that flavour bans could make pouches less attractive to adult smokers seeking alternatives and do little to address the root causes of youth experimentation.
Spain hides alternatives while cigarettes remain everywhere
Spain is considering a different strategy, but one that has generated similar criticism. Proposals backed by major political parties would restrict the sale of nicotine pouches and vaping products to specialist retailers, removing them from many mainstream retail environments. Meanwhile, it is highly contradictory that cigarettes are still easily found everywhere, just hanging out at convenience stores, gas stations, and supermarkets, while safer options get shoved out of view.
Public health experts highlight that even with years of tobacco control efforts, smoking rates in Spain are still quite high. In contrast, we have countries like Sweden and the UK, which have reached unprecedentedly low rates thanks to endorsing the use of non-combustible nicotine alternatives. Additional proposals under Spain’s draft tobacco control reforms include flavour restrictions and a proposed nicotine pouch limit of 0.99 mg per pouch. These low levels, explain experts, are insufficient for heavily dependent smokers seeking a viable substitute for cigarettes.
One of Europe’s toughest approaches
Poland is moving even further. New proposals would ban disposable vapes outright and allow nicotine pouches only in tobacco flavours. Consumer groups warn such measures could undermine smoking cessation efforts and strengthen black-market activity. Polling among Polish nicotine pouch users shows that flavours really matter when it comes to helping smokers switch from cigarettes. Many consumers mentioned they would likely go back to smoking or look for products in unofficial places if their favourite flavours were taken away.
Sadly, such patterns are seen across the globe. Take Estonia, for instance, where in recent years taxes were set on e-liquids, certain flavours were banned, and online sales restrictions were imposed that went above and beyond what the EU requires. Vaping demand did not vanish; Estonians just started turning to cross-border and black markets.
Government data revealed that legal sales took a nosedive, while independent studies indicated that most consumption moved outside regulated channels. Subsequently, when the restrictions were eased a bit, and people could access products more easily, tax revenues bounced back significnatly. This proves that the demand had never really gone away.
Sweden paves the way
Meanwhile, throughout these debates, Sweden remains the uncomfortable outlier. Thanks to the widespread adoption of snus and nicotine pouches, Sweden has the lowest smoking rates in Europe and some of the lowest rates of smoking-related disease. Sweden’s win in public health didn’t come from just banning nicotine; it came from swapping out cigarettes for safer options. This idea is really what tobacco harm reduction is all about. While many might still use nicotine, tangible health benefits are observed when cigarettes are ditched.
It is about time that Europe wakes up. Governments can continue pursuing increasingly restrictive measures focused on nicotine itself or embrace a risk-proportionate approach that recognises the huge difference between smoking and smoke-free alternatives. As more countries tighten rules on vaping products and nicotine pouches, the central question remains unchanged: will Europe’s next generation be protected from nicotine, or protected from smoking? The answer could determine whether the continent follows Sweden’s successful path—or repeats mistakes that history has already exposed.
Substitution, Not Abstinence: Danish Data Are The Latest to Teach us About Tobacco Harm Reduction
