A different perspective on nicotine. What do the researchers say and the successful case of Sweden?

The solution is to look at nicotine from a different perspective. By educating the public on the one hand and adopting appropriate regulations on nicotine use on the other hand, health risks can be minimized.
Nicotine has been considered dangerous for a long time. But, although this perception about nicotine is not completely wrong since it is a constituent part of cigarettes, in fact as a substance in itself its danger is not as great as it is claimed.
Psychologist and clinical researcher, Karl Fagerström from Sweden argues that although nicotine is found in cigarettes which are harmful, if we were to analyze the effect of nicotine as a substance in the body, we can say that it does not represent the danger that is claimed.
As a researcher and author of the books "Nicotine Dependence and Smoking Cessation", Fagerström believes that Sweden's experience with the use of reduced-risk products containing nicotine proves that the use of alternative products with higher risk has reduced tobacco consumption, as well as reduced the population's exposure to tobacco-related diseases. This indicator, argues the researcher, cannot be a coincidence.
In the report "No smoke, less harm" drawn up by prominent international health researchers, they tried to highlight the scientific data and evidence that prove that smoking is dangerous, not nicotine itself.
In other words, tobacco consumption causes a number of health problems, but smokeless alternatives do not have the same effect. In Sweden, policy makers chose a less dangerous alternative to nicotine which led to significantly better results. Thus, compared to the European average, Sweden records 38% fewer deaths caused by smoking and a 41% reduction in lung cancer patients.
Also, almost 1 in 4 people in Sweden consume nicotine, the same figure as in Albania. These figures show that Swedes did not avoid nicotine, but simply accepted safer forms of taking it. Historically, the positioning of public health regarding this substance has been the same: "Nicotine is the enemy". However, although the amount of use is the same in Sweden, the form of consumption changes, through nicotine pouches or other smokeless alternatives, not burning tobacco, argues Fagerström.
How did Sweden achieve this success?
The solution was to look at nicotine from a different perspective. By educating the public on the one hand and adopting appropriate regulations on nicotine use on the other, health risks can be minimized without the need to completely ban nicotine.
Fagerström compares nicotine to caffeine. Like caffeine, nicotine is an inseparable companion for many people, for some it can be considered an addiction and for others 'comfort'. He believes this approach shows that the focus should be on how you use nicotine. If a clear distinction is not made and the right information is given, there is a risk of harming people who need help, i.e. smokers who want to quit smoking.
To dwell in more detail on the report "No smoke, less harm", the researcher calls on the world to rethink the fight against nicotine. It also calls for shifting the focus of policymakers worldwide to harm reduction strategies that could save millions of lives.
"It is a call to policy makers, health workers and society as a whole to abandon the uninformed prejudice against nicotine and recognize the real enemy - smoke, not the substance
Sweden is proof that it is difficult to succeed when distinguishing between addiction and illness. It is time for the global community to follow the proven example of Sweden, as a plan for a healthier world!" - concludes Fagerström.