Former Swedish MP Johan Nissinen reveals the strategies behind Sweden's success in the fight against smoking
2025-02-11 14:27:07
TiranaPost
In an exclusive interview with Healthnews, Johan Nissinen, former member of the Swedish Parliament and the European Parliament, shares the secrets of Sweden's success in achieving its goal of becoming a smoke-free country.
Nissinen, a prominent figure in Swedish politics, discusses the innovative policies and approaches that have made Sweden a global model in the fight against smoking. This talk provides valuable information on how other countries can learn from the Swedish experience to combat this global phenomenon.
As one of the main actors in introducing the concept of tobacco harm reduction, what were the main difficulties from a legal point of view?
Some of the initial difficulties were: Public perception and cultural aspects. Some health authorities and support groups were skeptical of alternatives like snus, due to fears of promoting nicotine use, even though the latter was found to be less harmful than tobacco.
Meanwhile, at a global level, international organizations such as the WHO were hesitant to endorse these strategies at the time, influencing discussions in Sweden. There were also questions about whether scientific studies on alternative products should be accepted or not.
Can you tell us more about the key points of the regulatory process that led to the current tobacco harm reduction strategy?
The journey begins in 1995 with Sweden becoming a member of the European Union, which was exempt from the EU rule banning snus. It should be noted that it was banned in the EU.
In the 2000s, scientific evidence began to show the benefits of using alternative products, especially in reducing smoking-related diseases. Subsequently, from 2010-2025, discussions increased about the inclusion of new nicotine alternatives. In 2018, discussions expanded in the regulatory aspect to include new products such as vaping, based on scientific evidence and international evidence.
How did the political parties reach an agreement on this approach? What were the strategies that proved effective?
Consensus was reached through several strategic actions that included public health benefits, scientific support, and stakeholder participation. The focus was primarily on reducing disease and public health costs through snus use.
Scientific research was presented to parliamentary committees to support regulation. Further stakeholder involvement, where political parties engaged health experts, consumer groups and industry representatives to arrive at a balanced approach.
What was the role of scientific studies in the formation of laws?
Scientific studies played an important role in showing the relative safety of smokeless products such as snus. Findings from these studies showed that Sweden had lower rates of cancer and deaths from smoking compared to other EU countries. This was used as the basis for the subsequent formation of the legal framework.
How were the concerns of stakeholders such as public health professionals, the tobacco industry, and consumer groups addressed?
The legislative process established strict rules on the marketing of alternative products for the purpose of consumer safety. At the same time, it provided space for alternatives such as snus and nicotine pouches to replace traditional tobacco.
Did EU regulations or international agreements influence the development of Sweden's legal framework?
EU directives, such as the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), had an impact. Sweden used its exemption from the EU snus ban to support smoking reduction and create a model of success.
What advice would you give to legislators in other countries who are considering similar tobacco harm reduction laws?
The Swedish experience offers valuable lessons for other countries, especially when it comes to using harm reduction strategies as an option in the fight against smoking.
Base decisions on scientific evidence and ensure that alternatives are available and regulated by law to prevent abuse. Engage stakeholders and monitor results to make changes when necessary. Promote consumer education to combat misinformation about alternatives such as nicotine pouches and heated products.
