NEW DELHI, Oct. 6, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — The Consumer Choice Center hosted a press briefing this month on ‘Harm Reduction and the FCTC’s Missed Opportunities’ in Philippines, bringing together physicians, researchers, and consumer advocates from seven countries to discuss critical aspects of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and present alternative approaches to reducing tobacco-related harm.
“We needed an honest conversation about what’s working and what isn’t in global tobacco control,” said Fred Roeder, Health Economist and President of the Consumer Choice Center. “Many countries have seen different results with harm reduction approaches, yet these strategies remain largely unexplored in Southeast Asian policy discussions.”
Economic Impact of Current Tobacco Policies
Christopher Cabuay, PhD, Associate Professor of Economics at De la Salle University, presented data highlighting tobacco-related illnesses’ financial burden on the Philippine economy. His research revealed that these diseases cost the Philippines approximately $9.8 billion annually in 2019, equivalent to 2.48% of GDP.
“The cost of tobacco-related illness to an economy essentially is an inefficiency,” Cabuay explained. “We are diverting valuable economic resources to treating these diseases. When we talk of resources, I’m not talking about money—I’m talking about people, because the greatest resource that a country has is not the money, but its people.”
Cabuay’s economic modeling suggests substantial cost savings potential in the Philippines. If 10% of the adult smoking population engaged in tobacco harm reduction activities, the Philippines could decrease illness costs by $687 million annually. Meanwhile, if half shifted to harm reduction approaches, the country could expect up to $3.4 billion in cost reductions, approximately PHP 195 billion.
Consumer Perspectives Drive Policy Discussions
Anton Israel from the Nicotine Consumers Union, Philippines, highlighted the disconnect between policy formation and consumer experiences: “Consumers are consistently ignored, stigmatized, and silenced in the policies that rule our lives,” Israel stated. “The mandates, guidelines, and directives do not represent us as nicotine consumers.”
Malaysia’s regulatory challenges were examined through economic efficiency lens. Recent policy reversals and inconsistent state-level implementations have created market uncertainties that potentially drive consumers toward illicit products, undermining both public health and economic objectives.
International Policy Frameworks and Market Realities
Nancy Loucas from CAPHRA, New Zealand, highlighted how restrictive policies impact regional economies. “When you ban something or restrict it so severely that people can’t access it, if people want it bad enough, they will go to the illicit market,” Loucas explained. “Not only is the problem lost tax revenue for government – there’s no control on what people buy.”
Michael Landl from the World Vapers’ Alliance demonstrated how risk-based taxation creates economic incentives for behavior change while maintaining government revenue. Sweden’s approach, taxing products according to relative harm levels, achieved smoking rates below 6% while maintaining comparable nicotine consumption to other European countries.
“Smart countries tax according to risk levels to give smokers another incentive, apart from health, to switch to less harmful alternatives,” Landl noted, contrasting this with Germany where high taxes on reduced-risk products generated only 30% of projected revenue due to cross-border purchasing.
Regional Economic Implications
The experts noted that inefficient tobacco policies have broader regional implications, particularly for developing countries where resources need redirection toward productive economic activities. The discussion emphasized regulatory approaches that acknowledge consumer choice and market realities while considering economic efficiency alongside public health objectives.
Participating international experts issued a joint declaration: “We call on the WHO FCTC and country delegates to fully integrate harm reduction into tobacco control. The evidence is clear: combustion kills, not nicotine. Safer alternatives exist and are effective. This is the time to stand with science and evidence and fully implement health for all.”
About the Consumer Choice Center:
The Consumer Choice Center represents consumers in over 100 countries, advocating for lifestyle freedom, innovation, and evidence-based policymaking. The organization works to ensure regulatory decisions are transparent, proportionate, and focused on empowering individual choice across various policy areas.
https://consumerchoicecenter.org/about-us/
View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/global-health-experts-examined-whos-tobacco-control-approach-302575524.html
