“In the preparatory documents for COP 10, no change of course is suggested in the policies to combat cigarette smoking in the various countries”. It risks being “a wasted opportunity. Harm reduction should be a central strategy in the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, alongside existing measures to control and combat the spread of smoking.” Riccardo Polosa, professor of internal medicine at the University of Catania and founder of CoEhar, the Research Center for the Reduction of Smoking Harm at the University of Catania, said this to Adnkronos, referring to the comment published in The Lancet by two experts at eve of COP 10, the tenth Conference of the Parties on the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), i.e. the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control of the World Health Organization (WHO FCTC) to define the international guidelines that will affect the world of tobacco and alternative products, running in Panama until February 10th.
The article, written by New Zealand experts Robert Beaglehole and Ruth Bonita, “criticizes the WHO position on the equivalent treatment of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products, compared to traditional products – explains Polosa – underlining the lack of scientific justification for this comparing the success of harm reduction strategies in countries such as New Zealand, Sweden, Norway, England and Japan and calls on the WHO to embrace risk reduction and vaping as indispensable tools to reduce the number of smokers in a short time.” These countries “by adopting harm reduction policies, which include the use of alternative nicotine delivery systems such as electronic cigarettes, heated tobacco and oral nicotine products – explains the expert – have seen smoking rates reduce and improve public health outcomes by providing safer alternatives to traditional tobacco products.” Furthermore, “what was stated by the authors of the article published in The Lancet is in perfect harmony with the results of the CoEhar research at the University of Catania”.
Among the topics on the agenda at COP 10, “although the principles of harm reduction are mentioned – observes Polosa – no change of direction is suggested in the policies to combat cigarette smoking in the various countries. Alternative products are seen as a threatens tobacco regulation and even calls for them to be equated with traditional products”.
“It is a wasted opportunity – Polosa denounces – the idea of opening up to the debate on how to assist the efforts of those countries that instead want to introduce alternative products into their public health choices is not even taken into consideration. to ignore the opportunity that these products represent for public health policies and any beneficial side effects, such as a reduction in the economic pressure on the national health system of smoking-related pathologies. However, on this point, we hope to fight”.
The delegates of the countries adhering to the convention “meet periodically to discuss progress, implement new measures and update guidelines to strengthen smoking control throughout the world – explains the expert – 183 countries join the WHO Fctc, including the Italy”. Of course, “among the main issues under discussion at COP 10 in Panama City – lists Polosa – we find the evaluation of the impact obtained from the classic strategies to combat the use of tobacco and the regulations for new combustion-free products ( such as electronic cigarettes and new heated tobacco products) and their health, marketing and sales implications. The disunity also concerns which approaches to adopt to maximize countries' efforts in the fight against smoking. But the real focus of the debate is regulation of nicotine-releasing products and the possible adoption of strategies linked to the principles of harm reduction. A complex and multifaceted situation that closely concerns both the habits of adult smokers and youth addiction”.
The hope is “that the decision-makers of institutions around the world – underlines Polosa – understand how it is evident that, to achieve the eradication of cigarette smoking in a reasonable time, the current anti-smoking policies are not sufficient. It is A decisive change of pace is necessary by integrating the principle of harm reduction into existing policies, taking the example of virtuous countries, where epochal declines in cigarette consumption are evident. The appeal is that the ultimate aim of our action must be the health of people. Smokers are the ones we must look at and towards whom our efforts must be directed. It is the deaths directly linked to cigarette smoking that we must reduce and I think that a quiver with many arrows available – he concludes – is more effective than a single line of intervention which is already showing some cracks”.
#Fumo #Polosa #CoEhar #change #direction #Cop #wasted #opportunities