A GINN response to “The war on snus” The Cyprus Mail article “The war on snus” highlights a regulatory paradox that is becoming increasingly familiar across Europe: nicotine pouches are treated as an urgent public-health threat, while combustible cigarettes remain legally available, widely sold, and socially embedded. From a GINN perspective, the issue is not…
Executive context Innovation in nicotine pouches has largely focused on formulation variables, nicotine strength, pH, buffering systems, flavours, and moisture content. These factors shape nicotine delivery and user perception and are central to regulatory assessment. However, a growing body of clinical, observational, and design-science evidence indicates that oral tolerability and mucosal outcomes are also strongly…
Regulation, clinical context, and evidence-based harm reduction Cigarette smoking continues to impose a disproportionate health burden in Appalachia, a region marked by persistently high smoking prevalence, elevated rates of cardiovascular disease and cancer, and long-standing socioeconomic barriers to cessation support. Despite decades of tobacco control efforts, combustible cigarette use remains entrenched in many Appalachian communities,…
Recent analysis published in The Lancet Public Health reinforces a long-standing but often overlooked reality in tobacco control: nicotine use is not a monolith, and public-health outcomes depend critically on how nicotine is delivered. Policies that fail to distinguish between combustible and non-combustible products risk undermining smoking reduction goals, particularly among adults who continue to…
Nicotine pouch performance is often discussed almost exclusively in terms of formulation. Nicotine concentration, pH, buffering systems, flavour chemistry, and moisture balance dominate both technical development and regulatory review. These elements are undeniably important. However, emerging evidence and user experience suggest that formulation alone does not fully explain how nicotine pouches are tolerated, used, or…
Youth “addiction” to nicotine pouches and other smoke-free nicotine products is increasingly invoked as a political shorthand, often without reference to how addiction is actually defined in modern clinical science. This matters, because the DSM-5 framework, the global reference standard for diagnosing substance-related disorders, does not define addiction by frequency of use alone, nor does…
Expectations around the European Union’s next revision of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD3) have continued to shift, but a clearer picture is now emerging. Based on Commission planning documents, specialised monitoring services, and recent political signals, the most realistic scenario is that a formal Commission proposal will arrive in 2026, with any new regulatory obligations…
As nicotine pouches gain visibility in the United States and other markets, debate around their public-health role has intensified. Much of this discussion has been driven by concern over youth uptake and regulatory uncertainty. However, recent reporting in JAMA highlights a more nuanced picture, one in which several public-health experts recognise that nicotine pouches differ…
As nicotine pouch use expands globally, regulatory debate is increasingly framed as a choice between bans and permissive access. That framing is misleading. Evidence now points toward a more effective third path: risk-proportionate regulation that shapes product design to reduce harm while preserving adult access. Nicotine pouches are neither risk-free nor uniform. Their public-health impact…
Why excise policy matters for harm reduction in Europe Europe’s nicotine policy framework is entering a critical phase. Recent reporting on draft revisions to the EU Tobacco Excise Directive suggests that forthcoming tax proposals could significantly reshape the market for nicotine pouches, heated tobacco products, and other smoke-free alternatives. While excise taxation is a legitimate…