New Zealand is planning to introduce so-called ‘endgame’ measures, including the removal of nicotine from legally available tobacco.
We examine and review the modelling used to justify the measure and find multiple fatal flaws.
In this blog, we take a look at modelling used to justify ‘endgame’ legislation under discussion in New Zealand. Among other things, this would reduce nicotine in cigarettes and other tobacco available through legal channels to minimal levels. We find the modelling and data assumptions bear no relation whatsoever to the underlying processes and the effects that such legislation would trigger. Deep cuts in smoking are assumed as inputs to the model. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the model results show deep cuts in smoking, and this determines the resulting health benefits. But the assumptions have no grounding in reality and misinterpret and misuse trial findings.
- Background
- Regulating to reduce nicotine in cigarettes
- Modelling the impacts of a law to reduce nicotine in cigarettes
- A critique of the modelling
- An overview of our critique
- Summary
- Recommendations
- Analysis (abridged)
- Conclusion
- The fatal flaws
- The wrong way to do public health
Clive Bates – The Counterfactual – 2022-11-06.
Want More Investigative Content?
