Safer alternatives to cigarettes could save millions of lives and billions of pounds, says think tank

Promoting safer alternatives to cigarettes could save 19 million years of life by 2030 and reduce smoking-related costs to taxpayers by up to £12.6 billion annually, a new report from the Adam Smith Institute (ASI) has revealed.

The think tank argues that the UK government's current approach to achieving a Smoke Free 2030 - defined as reducing smoking rates to 5 per cent or lower - is both illiberal and unworkable and will significantly set back progress against smoking related harm. The ASI warns that policies such as a generational tobacco ban, a new tax on vapes, and restrictions on heated tobacco products and flavours will hinder harm reduction efforts.

According to the report, outright bans in other countries have failed, and a generational tobacco ban in the UK could lead to unintended consequences, including fuelling black markets, as seen in Australia and South Africa. The proposed vape tax and the ban on disposable vapes are expected to deter smokers from switching to safer alternatives, with research suggesting that 29 per cent of disposable e-cigarette users might return to smoking if the ban is implemented.

“The evidence is overwhelming - tobacco harm reduction (THR) products reduce smoking-rates and save lives. Alongside scrapping the generational ban, the government must urgently reconsider its punitive restrictions on harm reduction products,” Maxwell Marlow, director of research at the ASI and report co-author, said.

The ASI advocates for policies that embrace market-driven harm reduction strategies, drawing inspiration from Sweden's success in becoming smoke-free through the widespread availability of reduced-risk products like snus. The think tank's key recommendations include:

• Scrapping the Generational Smoking ban or at the very least carve out Type 1 heated tobacco products;

• Reversing the ban on disposable e-cigarettes to prevent current users reverting to smoking;

• Scrapping the vape tax, as this is likely to deter the uptake of refillable e-cigarettes as a long-term quitting aid;

• Expanding access to THR products via pharmacies, hospitals and hospitality venue;

• Legalising Swedish snus to provide consumers with a greater choice of reduced risk products;

• Removing punitive restrictions on the marketing of reduced risk products and, instead, ensuring that advertising standards are properly enforced so as to not attract under-aged users;
• Undertaking a wider public health campaign to counter disinformation surrounding reduced risk products, encouraging more smokers to make the switch.

If Smoke Free 2030 was achieved, we could save 19 million years of life in the UK. The figure reflects the cumulative increase in life expectancy for all smokers, adding up to 19 million years across the entire population. Research by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) showed that smoking costs the UK taxpayer £21.8 billion annually. Based on ASH’s methodology, implementing the strategy outlined in the report could reduce this cost by between £9.2 billion and £12.6 billion, ASI added.

Several MPs have weighed in on the ASI's findings. Rupert Lowe, Reform UK MP for Great Yarmouth, warned against government overreach, stating, “This is a step towards government control over personal freedoms. It may start with smoking but it certainly will not stop there.”

Conservative MP Greg Smith echoed concerns about the feasibility of the generational ban, arguing that “the illiberalism of the generational smoking ban aside, there is no evidence to suggest it would even work.”

Labour MP Mary Glindon, who chairs the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Responsible Vaping, however, supported the harm reduction strategy, saying, “The government is right to strengthen its commitment to a Smoke-Free 2030. By adopting a harm reduction strategy, we could save 19 million years of life while reducing the burden smoking-related harms place on the NHS.”