Global Forum on Nicotine

In the next GFNTV Interviews, Reem Ibrahim explains the flawed logic blocking tobacco harm reduction. Vapes, nicotine pouches, and snus help millions quit smoking - yet public health officials dismiss them because they’re made by tobacco companies.

Smoking is a leading cause of preventable death, yet the debate over safer nicotine alternatives divides experts. Are policies driven by fear blocking smokers from less harmful options? When evidence is overwhelming, harm reduction must play a bigger role in global health.

In Australia, 85% of the total nicotine market is now illicit. Why? Because when you make the legal process a headache, people look elsewhere. From pharmacy-only rules to restricted flavors, over-regulation has created a massive underground industry.

The world is shifting right under our noses. From traditional tobacconists closing their doors to the rise of vape shops on every corner, the landscape is unrecognizable compared to just a decade ago. GSTHR is building a visual library of this evolution and you can help.

Vaping Isn't A Gateway To Smoking! Youth Smoking PLUMMETS! Data shows that as vaping rates rose, youth smoking fell to historically low levels in the U.S. If vaping led to smoking, we’d see the opposite.

The argument is made that the ban on snus is one of the biggest public health oversights in EU history. While the FDA recognizes its potential to reduce clinical health risks compared to cigarettes, the EU maintains a strict ban (with the exception of Sweden).

A new “gateway effect” study claims vaping leads to smoking - but its own review admits the evidence is biased and low quality. That contradiction isn’t just sloppy - it raises serious questions about how conclusions are being framed. Science deserves better than mixed messages.

One person might decide on legislation - without Parliament having its say. When laws that affect millions can be introduced without full parliamentary scrutiny. It raises broader questions about transparency, accountability, and how legislation should be made.

UK Government Thought a Ban Would Fix This… It Didn’t.

How did nicotine pouches help Sweden go smoke-free? Watch the full interview with Carissa Düring to hear the full story.

Why does bringing science to everyone matter?

What's The Truth Behind Nicotine Myths? Watch today's interview with Dr Rohan Sequeira, who examines how public health distorts the public’s understanding of nicotine and how misinformation continues to block harm reduction. 📺 youtu.be/JsibyYN6feM

In some policy areas, large donors shape outcomes indirectly by influencing research funding, which organizations and experts are seen as credible, and which questions are considered settled. Over time, this can lead to a narrow range of perspectives driven by how funding and access are structured.

Experts are challenging a recent nicotine report, saying it is not a scientific study and ignores key evidence. Large-scale data show that switching from smoking to safer nicotine products can significantly reduce heart risk. A “one message, one risk” narrative may deter life-saving changes.

UK Smokefree 2030 Goal: Will New Bans Derail It? What do the latest proposals really mean for smokers and vapers? Watch the full interview with Martin Cullip as he breaks down the recent updates to the UK Tobacco & Vapes Bill and their potential impact.

Real progress is happening. Sweden and New Zealand are moving toward smoke-free status. The trend is clear: fewer cigarettes, better outcomes, healthier future.

Youth Vaping FALLS 70% Since 2019 and No One's Talking About This…

AG Miller shifted his stance after reviewing science showing that moving smokers from combustibles to safer alternatives like e-cigs and pouches could save lives. Experts across politics saw the same evidence — harm reduction works.

People will continue to use nicotine — the question is how to make it safer. Focusing on harm reduction could be a practical way to improve public health and reduce the risks linked to smoking.

What's the REAL WHO’s Stance on Tobacco Harm Reduction? The WHO says it supports public health — but where does it really stand on vaping and harm reduction? 🤔They keep saying we “need more research” — but the evidence is already clear.

Nicotine gets blamed for everything — but it’s not the killer. It’s the smoke. And science has known this for a while…

Why is the government so obsessed with nicotine addiction? 🤔 If someone chooses to enjoy nicotine or anything else without harming anyone — why should it be anyone’s business? When does “protecting public health” turn into overreach?

🚨 Headlines say vape-related ER visits are skyrocketing among US youth in 2025 — but the story isn't that simple. Many “vaping-related” cases are logged simply because patients mention they vape, even when it’s unrelated to their condition.

Many everyday substances are addictive — from caffeine in coffee to nicotine. The difference often lies in perception: coffee is part of daily life, while nicotine is linked to tobacco. It’s worth asking how society decides which habits are treated more harshly.

How the EU applies the precautionary principle to vaping? Instead of asking regulators to prove vaping is dangerous, the burden is now on proving it is safe — shifting the focus from risk management to managing uncertainty.

Science isn’t just opinion - it’s evidence that has already shaped laws around the world. We’re pushing for change not by guessing, but by showing how data can guide smarter, safer policies. You don’t have to copy others, but you can’t ignore the science.