In recent years, safer nicotine/tobacco alternatives like nicotine pouches, vapes, and heated tobacco products have emerged as pivotal smoking cessation tools. Yet, paradoxically, many governments around the world are moving to restrict or outright ban these products, even as traditional cigarettes remain widely available.
In a wave of sweeping legislative action, governments around the world are moving to ban or severely restrict safer nicotine alternatives—such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products (HTPs), and nicotine pouches. From Central Asia to Europe and Hong Kong, a seemingly coordinated clampdown is taking shape, often under the premise of youth protection and public health. But while the intentions behind these policies may be noble, their consequences are anything but.
On April 30th, Uzbekistan became the latest country to enact a full-scale ban on electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). Approved by the Senate during the sixth plenary session of the Oliy Majlis, the new law bans the production, sale, import, export, and even possession of products like vape pens and heat-not-burn devices. Violators face criminal penalties, though a provision allows for leniency for those who voluntarily surrender their products. The government says the law aims to safeguard public health and align with similar bans in neighboring Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.
Kazakhstan outlawed e-cigarette sales and imports in 2023, and it’s comparable ban will take effect in July 2025. Together, these measures represent a growing trend across Central Asia—a regional shutdown of harm-reduction tools that could otherwise help millions of adult smokers reduce or quit cigarette use.
Meanwhile, Hong Kong is preparing to take things even further. Under a new legislative package expected to take effect by April 2026, public possession of e-cigarettes will be banned outright. The city also plans to double fines for smoking-related offenses, expand smoke-free zones, and impose new restrictions on flavored tobacco products—excluding menthol. Notably, the government intends to phase out flavour additives altogether by 2027, beginning with a partial ban and escalating to a full prohibition. These sweeping reforms follow two consecutive years of steep tobacco tax hikes, which have pushed cigarette prices to nearly HK$100 per pack.
Across the globe in Europe, Spain—a country that recently saw smoking rates decline alongside a sharp increase in vaping—planned government crackdowns on vaping and other safer alternatives are poised to reverse that progress. In line with trends witnessed across the globe, between 2022 and 2024, daily smoking among adults dropped from 33.1% to 25.8%, while vaping rates surged. However, new regulatory proposals now threaten to undermine these gains. Planned measures include a tax on vape liquids and nicotine pouches, a ban on all flavours except tobacco, and a cap on nicotine strength well below levels effective for smoking cessation.
Burning out harm reduction
Public health experts are alarmed. Dr. Delon Human, a prominent harm reduction advocate, has warned that such restrictions disproportionately affect low-income smokers and risk stalling Spain’s progress in cutting tobacco use. A recent report from Smoke Free Sweden estimates that over 30,000 Spanish lives could have been saved had the country adopted Sweden’s more progressive model, where nicotine pouches and vaping products are widely accessible to adults.
Sadly, Poland is following a similar trajectory. The Polish Senate Health Committee has endorsed a bill banning flavoured heated tobacco products, including fruit and candy variants. Health warnings will be mandatory on all packaging, and additional regulations are being introduced to further restrict vape and nicotine pouch access, particularly among minors. Taxes on vapes have also risen by 75%, with more hikes planned in the coming years.
While these actions are often justified as necessary to protect youth, they represent a troubling form of policy overreach. There is no doubt that youth access must be controlled. But blanket bans ignore a critical distinction: nicotine, while addictive, is not the primary cause of smoking-related diseases. It is the act of burning tobacco—and the thousands of toxic chemicals released in the process—that kills.
Safer but banned
Safer nicotine alternatives like vapes and heated tobacco products eliminate combustion. Numerous studies, including those by Public Health England, the Royal College of Physicians, and independent researchers, have concluded that these products are significantly less harmful than cigarettes. In Sweden, where harm reduction is embraced, adult smoking rates have fallen to just 5.3%—the lowest in Europe—accompanied by the continent’s lowest rate of smoking-related diseases like lung cancer.
The bans now sweeping across Asia and Europe threaten to derail this progress. By targeting safer alternatives while leaving deadly cigarettes on the market, governments may inadvertently drive users back to more harmful behaviors. Even worse, they risk fueling black markets, where unregulated and potentially dangerous products flourish without oversight, which is exactly what has happened in countries where sweeping bans have been set, such as Australia.
There is a better path. Rather than prohibition, countries should adopt a regulatory approach that strikes a balance—protecting minors while giving adults access to proven harm-reduction tools. Measures such as age verification, plain packaging, sensible flavour restrictions (without full bans), and public education campaigns, could mitigate risks without cutting off safer choices entirely.
When good intentions backfire
Public health policy must be guided by evidence, not panic. As the global tobacco epidemic continues to claim more than 8 million lives each year, it is imperative that policymakers distinguish between nicotine and the method of delivery. By conflating the two, they risk trading innovation for ideology—and progress for regression. If these bans persist, the world may look back on this moment as a turning point—not in the fight against tobacco, but in the abandonment of the most promising tools to end it.