Our panicky and reactionary regulation of e-cigarettes is getting in the way of saving lives

My colleagues relentlessly mock me for having a vape with Adam Smith’s head displayed on its control screen. But since their emergence onto the market, e-cigarettes have become a key part of smoking cessation efforts in the UK and beyond.

Unlike many other countries, successive governments here have adopted a broadly liberal harm reduction approach when it comes to vaping. Being able to vape in my office, for example, is a big incentive to avoid the hassle of going outside for a cigarette.

Earlier this year, Public Health England reaffirmed its commitment to sensible harm reduction by updating its guidance on vaping to state that e-cigarettes are at least 95 per cent safer than traditional smoking.

The results of this liberalism are clear. While England has seen an annual drop in the smoking rate of 0.95 percentage points between 2013 and 2016, vape-banning Australia saw a drop of just 0.2 percentage points during the same period.

Public Health England estimates that tens of thousands of British citizens are quitting smoking as a result of e-cigarettes every year, and for the first time, over half of vapers are ex-smokers. That's thousands of lives saved and years longer those that quit will live.

Initial concerns about e-cigarettes appealing to non-smokers have not been substantiated, with a vanishingly low proportion of vapers stating that they have never smoked cigarettes. 

Even if e-cigarettes had been adopted by a large number of those who had never smoked before, it would take 20 of them starting the habit at a minimum to outweigh the overall health gains of just one cigarette smoker switching to vaping.

Despite all this, young women are being left behind in this harm reduction revolution. According to the most recent figures from Action on Smoking and Health, young men are more than three times as likely to be vapers as their young female counterparts.

In a new paper, the Adam Smith Institute estimates that over one million additional years of life could be gained if we closed this gender gap through sensible policy reforms.

This discrepancy is not down to gender differences in cigarette smoking: young men and women smoke at similar rates.

The most significant impediment to encouraging switching to e-cigarettes is arguably our advertising restrictions, some of which are mandated by the European Union’s Tobacco Products Directive.

As a result of these restrictions, we find ourselves in a ludicrous situation where a majority of smokers think that e-cigarettes are no safer than smoking tobacco. Marketers are forbidden from communicating Public Health England’s “at least 95 per cent safer” statement in any form, and promotional advertising is largely prohibited.

For many smokers, vaping simply isn’t cool, and changing that perception could result in a huge win for public health.

E-cigarettes aren’t the only weapon in our harm reduction arsenal.

Heat-not-burn devices (which use a heating element to produce a nicotine-containing vapour from tobacco without combustion occurring) can appeal to smokers who have stronger preferences for tobacco flavours and need a more “cigarette-like” experience to make the switch. In Japan, smokers are switching to these products at a remarkable rate.

A growing body of independent evidence is showing that heat-not-burn devices are substantially safer than smoking, with Public Health England stating that they “may be considerably less harmful than tobacco cigarettes.”

Other new products that combine elements of vaping and heat-not-burn technology are also being developed, and we must ensure that these are brought to market efficiently. The more reduced-risk products on the market, the more likely there will be something available for every smoker to move to, and help reduce the health risks of their nicotine habit.

Lots of people are addicted to nicotine and many enjoy the experience of smoking cigarettes. They also don’t want to die early from various smoking-related diseases.

While advocates of free markets have tended to focus on defending the freedom to smoke, public health bodies have successfully argued the indisputable negative health impacts.

Much is often made of the conflict between free market advocates and public health bodies. Well, e-cigarettes and heat-not-burn technology represent a win-win for both. Personal choice maintained and reduced health risks. Now we just need politicians to catch up with the consensus.

Daniel Pryor  is Head of Programmes at the Adam Smith Insitute

For more from Refresh, including debates, videos and events,  join our Facebook group and follow us on Twitter @TeleRefresh