Different narratives, conflicting reports on the consequence of the use of nicotine, ambiguous choices by lawmakers. Many consumers lost confidence in governments, international institutions, and scientists because of lack of information on smoking cessation products. Why there is a struggle for consumers to find reliable and consistent information about electronic cigarettes and alternative nicotine delivery systems?
Catania Conversation discusses with Charles Gardner, expert in institutional communication and Chief Executive Officer of the International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organizations (INNCO), an international NGO that supports and represents the rights of over ninety million consumers in thirty-five countries.
Mr Gardner, why there is an “information gap” between the scientific community and consumers when it comes to Tobacco Harm Reduction?
There are several reasons behind this trend. Firstly, the struggle that lasted over forty years against Big tobacco, which in last decades have massively influenced scientific research to introduce a “scientific doubt” regarding the toxicity of their products. A struggle that helped the creation of a narrative that demonized the use of nicotine and undermined the credibility of any information emanating from the Big Tobacco. Today, however, this is no longer the case since the importance of harm reduction has also been understood within the tobacco industry. Secondly, the lack of knowledge of part of the scientific community about cigarette substitutes and the false beliefs, with no scientific ground, that nicotine is the cause of cancer and lung diseases. Finally, the inadequate information that consumers receive from public institutions about the benefits and risks of alternative products. Although there are data available these kinds of information are buried and very difficult to access. The main consequence is that users aren’t able to make an informed choice, while millions of smokers see denied the opportunity to quit.
Catania Conversation – 2021-07-05.
Want More Investigative Content?
