fbpx

Month: January 2023

Chinese Battery Plant Posing Security Concerns

Remember when at the end of 2021, Hungarian Ambassador to Beijing mentioned that Hungary is proud to serve as the entry point for Chinese companies to the European Union? Most people were already thinking of the establishment of a Fudan University campus in Budapest, the Belgrade-Budapest Railroad, the notorious respiratory ventilator deal during Covid, and even helping high-tech companies enter the EU market. However, the latest and most talked about investment is building a battery plant in the city of Debrecen by Contemporary Amperex Technology Ltd (CATL). It is supposed to be a 8bn USD investment (plus the subsidies by the pro-Chinese Hungarian government), which is now one of the hottest topics in Hungary as many opposition parties and green organizations have been demonstrating publicly due to environmental concerns. Nevertheless, other worrisome issues should be mentioned regarding the plant.

According to Intelligence Online, the new plant serves the geopolitical interests of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Moreover, the investment is controlled by the CCP, and the Chinese and Hungarian foreign ministers make the most strategic decisions. It is no surprise that Hungary has shifted its trade focus from the west to the east in the past decade. Also, Prime Minister Orban, who is not only Putin’s biggest ally in the European Union, has praised the Chinese type of state capitalism in the past years. Besides these, there is an argument stating that China wants to reward Hungary for siding with it regarding Taiwan.

CATL perfectly fits in the line of TikTok, Huawei, Hikvision, Dahua, and others when it comes to conquering the European markets and using technologies and companies that directly serve the political interests of the communist party. It even looks like the Chinese government was racing with time to establish its key points in Europe before it was too late. And as we are experiencing now, the window of opportunity has been closing rapidly recently. Some EU countries have already got rid of the Huawei 5G network, the United States has introduced a ban on TikTok in federal institutions, and Canada is also moving in this direction. In the EU, some politicians have also voiced their concerns about Chinese economic expansion and a possible ban on TikTok due to human rights and security concerns. We at the Consumer Choice Center have also expressed our worry regarding excessive Chinese presence in Europe, and we have already called on EU lawmakers to consider a US-like ban on TikTok. Our standpoint is clear: as long as the CCP is involved in “private” business, they should not have anything to do with European trade. If there is a chance of sensitive data of EU citizens being handled by the communist party, EU leaders should opt for a zero-tolerance approach. Although many commentators and politicians offer attractive solutions, most would appease the Chinese. We uphold our argument that whenever security issues are concerned, a “forced divestiture of a company regulated and overseen by regulators in liberal democratic nations seems to be the most prudent measure.”

Smart regulation helps prevent underage vaping

KUALA LUMPUR, 27 January 2023 – The Consumer Choice Center (CCC) agrees with Malaysia’s Health Minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa regarding concerns about the sale of vape products to children.

According to the representative of the Malaysian Consumer Choice Center, Tarmizi Anuwar does not support vaping by youth or children under 18 years of age and suggests that the government quickly implement smart laws to regulate the sale and marketing of vape products. 

“Underage children should not be allowed to buy vape products. In order to avoid or reduce the risk of this happening, the government needs to create a separate law or expand current tobacco regulations for the sale and marketing of vape.”

“There are several steps that the government can take including introducing smart regulations and enforcing strict age restrictions on vaping devices and liquids at the point of sale and using modern age verification technology for online sales.”

“The absence of laws will make it easier for children to obtain vapes from black market activities and illegal trade.”

Elaborating on Dr Zaliha’s statement regarding the classification of nicotine under the Poisons Act 1952, he said, “Nicotine replacement products have already been exempted from the Poisons Act 1952 in October last year. This means that nicotine is no longer considered a non-toxic product.”

“Technically, vape can be considered as a nicotine replacement product because the main purpose is to be used as an aid to quit smoking.”

“However, this is one of the areas of public policy that still need to be improved so that there is no confusion.”

In addition, Tarmizi emphasized that this law is also important in differentiating vape products between responsible adult users and children.

“This law is important to ensure that adult consumers have a legitimate choice to choose products that are less risky and harmful and move towards a healthier lifestyle.”

“The government is also not justified in using this argument to limit access to responsible users because it has not yet been proven about reports or articles that link vaping as a gateway to smoking.”

Based on an analytical survey by Lee, Coombs dan Afolalu (2018) said the actual factors of vaping among youth have yet to be proven. In addition, according to the Royal College of Physicians, reports stating that teenagers who use vaping are at risk of potentially giving birth to a generation affected by nicotine are not based on evidence.

The best answer to TikTok is a forced divestiture 

As consumer advocates, we pride ourselves as standing for policies that promote policies fit for growth, lifestyle freedom, and tech innovation. 

In usual regulatory circumstances, that means protecting consumers’ platform and tech choices  from the zealous hands of regulators and government officials who would otherwise seek to shred basic Internet protections and freedom of speech, as well as break up innovative tech companies. Think Section 230, government jawboning, and consequences of deplatforming.

As such, the antitrust crusades by select politicians and agency heads in the United States and Europe are of primary concern for consumer choice. We have written extensively about this, and better ways forward. Many of these platforms make mistakes and severe errors on content moderation, often in response to regulatory concerns. But that does not invite trust-busting politicians and regulators to meddle with companies that consumers value.

In the background of each of these legislative battles and proposals, however, there is a special example found in the Chinese-owned firm TikTok, today one of the most popular social apps on the planet. 

RELATED: Forcing TikTok’s divestiture from the CCP is both reasonable and necessary

The Special Case of TikTok

Now owned by Bytedance, TikTok offers a similar user experience to Instagram Reels, Snapchat, or Twitter, but is supercharged by an algorithm that serves up short videos that entice users with constant content that autoloads and scrolls by. Many social phenomena, dances, and memes propagate via TikTok.

In terms of tech innovation and its proprietary algorithm, TikTok is a dime a dozen. There is a reason it is one of the most downloaded apps on mobile devices in virtually every market and language. 

Researchers have already revealed that China’s own domestic version of TikTok, Douyin, restricts content for younger users. Instead of dances and memes, Douyin features science experiments, educational material, and time limits for underage users. TikTok, on the other hand, seems to have a suped-up algorithm that has an ability to better attract, and hook, younger children.

What makes it special for consumer concern beyond the content, however, is its ownership, privacy policies, and  far-too-cozy relationship with the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party, the same party that oversees concentration camps of its Muslim minority and repeatedly quashes human rights across its territories.

It has already been revealed that European users of the TikTok can, and have, had their data accessed by company officials in Beijing. And the same goes for US users. Considering the ownership location and structure, there isn’t much that can be done about this.

Unlike tech companies in liberal democracies, Chinese firms require direct corporate oversight and governance by Chinese Communist Party officials – often military personnel. In the context of a construction company or domestic news publisher, this doesn’t seemingly put consumers in liberal democracies at risk. But a popular tech app downloaded on the phones of hundreds of millions of users? That is a different story.

How best to address TikTok in a way that upholds liberal democratic values

Among liberal democracies, there are a myriad of opinions about how to approach the TikTok beast.

US FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr wants a total ban, much in line with Sen. Josh Hawley’s proposed ban in the U.S. Senate and U.S. Rep. Ken Buck’s similar ban in the House. But there are other ways that would be more in line with liberal democratic values.

One solution we would propose, much in line with the last US administration’s stance, would be a forced divestiture to a U.S.-based entity on national security grounds. This would mean a sale of US assets (or assets in liberal democracies) to an entity based in those countries that would be completely independent of any CCP influence.

In 2019-2020, when President Donald Trump floated this idea, a proposed buyer of TikTok’s U.S. assets would have been Microsoft, and later Oracle. But the deal fell through.

But this solution is not unique.

We have already seen such actions play out with vital companies in the healthcare space, including PatientsLikeMe, which uses sensitive medical data and real-time data to connect patients about their conditions and proposed treatments. 

When the firm was flooded with investments from Chinese partners, the Treasury Department’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) ruled that a forced divestiture would have to take place. The same has been applied to a Chinese ownership stake in Holu Hou Energy, a U.S.-subsidiary energy storage company.

In vital matters of energy and popular consumer technology controlled by elements of the Chinese Communist Party, a forced divestiture to a company regulated and overseen by regulators in liberal democratic nations seems to be the most prudent measure.

This has not yet been attempted for a wholly-owned foreign entity active in the US, but we can see why the same concerns apply.

An outright ban or restriction of an app would not pass constitutional muster in the US, and would have chilling effects for future innovation that would reverberate beyond consumer technology.

This is a controversial topic, and one that will require nuanced solutions. Whatever the outcome, we hope consumers will be better off, and that liberal democracies can agree on a common solution that continues to uphold our liberties and choices as consumers.

Yaël Ossowski is the deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center.

Alcohol labeling and ban: Ireland in the dark path of Lithuania

European Union member states are busy regulating alcohol use and limiting consumer choice even though historically, it has shown that bans and limitations on use have had the opposite effect as had been intended.

There are two recent examples of strict alcohol regulations, both coming from countries where alcohol consumption is high. Hence, lawmakers believe that limitations are needed to decrease the number of drinkers.

Lithuania started down this road in 2017 when Parliament put the following into to law: they banned the advertisement of alcohol; the legal age to buy alcohol was raised to twenty; the opening hours for shops to sell alcohol was shortened; in restaurants, maximum alcohol content was maximized; and alcohol sale at sports events or on the beach is also restricted.

The measures have become very unpopular among consumers in the past years. However, there has yet to be a severe political movement to repeal the law. As usual with similar bans (think of the Prohibition in the USA a century ago), people have found ways to find loopholes in the system. Youngsters asking their older friends to purchase alcohol, people crossing borders to find alcohol in other countries after the ban hours, or the illegal sale of alcohol at houses are just a few examples of the creative ways people come up with.

At the other end of the continent, Ireland has been active in regulating alcohol sales. Recently, plans have been introduced to label alcohol products with possible health risks once consumed. The decision is very disadvantageous for Irish consumers who will be deprived of some of the best wines of Italy, France or Portugal, because it will just not be worth it for them to take on the costs associated with relabeling bottles for a market as small as Ireland. Both sellers and buyers will lose due to this decision.

We at the Consumer Choice Center condemn any alarmist measure that is unjustified but would have the effect of influencing consumers to make negative decisions. It worries us to see that politicians are jumping on the bandwagon of populistic legislation for unfounded reasons, as treating all responsible drinkers as if they drink excessively is anything but a sound decision.

The message from consumers to lawmakers when they are obsessed with regulating their lives is that they should finally be considered adults and not treated like children when they want to make their own choice. If problematic drinking is an issue of concern in either of these countries, then legislative action should be taken in a targeted way that focuses on those who struggle with substance abuse, rather than a heavy handed approach that treats all drinkers as if they are alcoholics. 

Time for the EU to Counter TikTok

The free world is growing increasingly suspicious about the popular Chinese social media platform TikTok. In only the latest example, Canadian authorities are warning its citizens about the dangers of using the app for both their privacy and security.

Although TikTok denies sharing sensitive information about users with the Chinese government, the head of the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) Canadian Centre for Cyber Security still cautions users about the security of personal and contact information they share with the app.

Canada might be following in the footsteps of the United States, where, due to national security concerns, the usage of the Chinese app has been banned by the federal government for their employees on work-related devices. Moreover, several US states and public universities have followed the same path.

These actions, which mirror nuanced policy measures that aim to hold the app accountable while ensuring no sensitive devices download the app, are a new reality for liberal democracies aiming to ensure the security and privacy of its citizens and state employees. 

The Consumer Choice Center has already voiced concerns about the app’s growing number of vulnerable users in the European Union, and the influence of the CCP. Looking at the involvement of the Chinese Communist Party in the tech giant and its record of mass surveillance and human rights violations, lawmakers in the European Union should also start considering how to deal with TikTok. Although the parent company of the app has denied the abuse of individual data, it is more than worrying to experience how users’ personal information is being harvested and can be used once in the wrong hands.

There are more reasons to be concerned than just the dance videos and contact information uploaded to the popular sharing app. The Chinese government has invested heavily in artificial intelligence with mass surveillance in the past decade, and TikTok is only the latest iteration. 

Companies like Huawei or the state-owned CCTV manufacturers Hikvision and Dahua have already reached the level of worry in the European Union and been seriously considered by communications agencies and parliaments. As a result, Hikvision fever cameras, used during COVID, have already been banned from the premises due to human rights concerns. The Chinese Communist Party uses these cameras in serious human rights abuses against its Uyghur population.

It is time for the EU to step up its measures regarding TikTok as well before it is too late. We must emphasize that in expanding differences between liberal democracies and illiberal ones, the free world must understand how to properly address the technologies built and controlled by totalitarian regimes, hoping we can avoid severe security issues that will harm us in the long run. 

Therefore, the EU must consider smart policies to counter or curb TikTok’s influence among our state and governmental institutions. It may be a small step, but in the end we must favor technologies that help empower consumers and citizens, rather than subjugate them to the malicious influence of a totalitarian regime.

#ConsumerChoice: Mental Health

At a time when NHS dental services are in crisis – and A&E, ambulance and nursing services are the focus of industrial action due to pay and conditions adding extra strain on the workload – protecting and supporting the mental health of staff in the workplace must become a priority.

A spokesperson from the Consumer Choice Center reports from an event in Switzerland that aims to address the situation.

As world leaders gather in Davos, Switzerland, the Consumer Choice Center hosted a panel on the importance of mental health support. Speakers discussed how challenges to mental health are increasing after the COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and economic uncertainty, and focused on effective coping techniques.

The “Prioritising Mental Health in Times of Global Crisis” panel was moderated by Jillian Melchior, editorial board member at The Wall Street Journal, with opening remarks by Kathleen Kingsbury, Opinion Editor at The New York Times.

Kingsbury told her audience: “Journalists are no strangers to stress, anxiety and trauma. Just last week we lost a reporter in the newsroom, Blake Hounshell, after a long battle with depression.

Read the full text here

Corporate Canada has been protected from competition for too long. It’s time to put consumers first

Maybe you saw that report by the CBC’s Marketplace the other day on the cost of wireless telephone service in Canada. If so, maybe your fists have not yet unclenched from the little balls of rage that formed as you watched.

Quoting a recent study by the Finnish research firm Rewheel, the report found the cost per gigabyte of wireless data transmission in Canada is “seven times more expensive than Australia, 25 times more than Ireland and France, and 1,000 times more than Finland.”

For example, “scrolling Instagram for five minutes would cost about half a cent in France, while it would cost 20 cents in Canada. Downloading a half-hour show from YouTube would cost eight cents in Ireland and $1.03 in Canada. Downloading an entire season of Wednesday from Netflix would cost about $1.62 in Australia, and $10.22 in Canada.”

File this under shocking, but not surprising: Rewheel’s is only the latest in a string of reports to find the cost of wireless service in Canada is, if not the highest in the world, then certainly among the highest. Neither is wireless the only industry in which Canada enjoys that distinction.

Canadians also pay among the highest air fares, domestic or international, in the world. Using data from travel site Kiwi.com, the Consumer Choice Center found the cost of air travel per 100 kilometres was “2.1 times higher than in the United States, 2.8 times higher than in New Zealand and 3.6 times higher than in Portugal.”

Read the full article here

Pourquoi Il Faut Se Méfier De Titkok

Dans quelle mesure devons-nous être prudents lorsque nous adoptons des solutions technologiques chinoises ? 

TikTok est la star incontestable des réseaux sociaux actuellement, attirant plus d’utilisateurs nouveaux et de longue date que n’importe lequel de ses concurrents. L’entreprise chinoise a mis au point un algorithme qui permet aux utilisateurs de rester « accrochés » pendant des heures à son fil d’actualité, avec des vidéos de danse ou du matériel plus ou moins éducatif.

Cela dit, son origine commerciale est précisément ce qui pose un problème au nouveau géant des réseaux sociaux. Le service de l’entreprise Byte Dance, qui existe en Chine sous le nom de Douyin, avec un contenu bien différent, pose un problème du point de vue de la cyber-sécurité pour ses consommateurs.

Surveillance technologique

Le fait que le bras long du Parti communiste chinois (PCC) puisse pénétrer dans les téléphones des citoyens des démocraties libérales est en effet troublant et les individus doivent rester vigilants. L’entreprise a récemment admis d’avoir obtenu de manière inappropriée les données d’utilisateurs, dont un journaliste du Financial Times, afin d’analyser leur localisation dans le cadre d’une enquête interne sur les fuites.

Au cours de l’été dernier, quatre employés de l’équipe d’audit interne de ByteDance se sont penchés sur le partage d’informations internes à des journalistes. Deux membres du personnel aux Etats-Unis et deux en Chine ont eu accès aux adresses IP et à d’autres données personnelles de Cristina Criddle, journaliste du FT, afin de déterminer si elle se trouvait à proximité d’un employé de ByteDance, a indiqué l’entreprise.

Des risques de cybersécurité similaires existent pour le fournisseur d’infrastructures de télécommunications Huawei, et l’entreprise technologique ZTE. Dans quelle mesure devons-nous être prudents lorsque nous adoptons des solutions technologiques chinoises, quand nous savons à quel point l’Etat chinois ne respecte pas la vie privée des consommateurs et la liberté d’expression, et qu’il est capable de saper la sécurité en ligne des utilisateurs européens ?

Il semble que la Commission européenne organise des réunions avec des responsables de TikTok, sans doute pour réduire leur double standard qui consiste à s’en prendre régulièrement à Facebook et Twitter tout en ignorant la question plus pressante du pouvoir de TikTok.

En fait, les changements d’interface utilisateur pour les services de Meta et de Google montrent à quel point les produits fabriqués aux Etats-Unis subissent la pression de TikTok : Instagram et YouTube ont tous deux adopté le défilement sans fin de vidéos dans le style de TikTok sur leurs plateformes, sans doute pour attirer l’attention des jeunes utilisateurs qui ont intégré cet usage en ligne dans leur vie quotidienne. La plupart des utilisateurs en ligne de la génération Z (nés entre 1997 et 2010) consomment désormais surtout du matériel vidéo qui ne dépasse pas une durée individuelle de 15-20 secondes.

Bien peu de réactions

Comme l’écrit le commentateur américain Adam Kovacevich :

« Nous savons également que le gouvernement chinois a un intérêt primordial à accéder aux données américaines. Il y a plusieurs années, le PCC a orchestré l’un des plus grands piratages de données gouvernementales de l’histoire des Etats-Unis. Leur cible n’était pas le Pentagone ni même la CIA. Ils visaient l’Office of Personnel Management, l’agence gouvernementale où sont stockées les données de tous les employés fédéraux.

Ce piratage a visé les données privées de plus de 21 millions de personnes. Il s’agissait d’une grave atteinte à la souveraineté internationale, avec la possibilité de représailles, et il fallait une attaque sophistiquée. Imaginez maintenant que le gouvernement chinois ait un accès immédiat aux données de 80 millions d’utilisateurs américains, sans qu’aucune violation de la sécurité du gouvernement américain ne soit nécessaire pour accéder à ces enregistrements. C’est ça TikTok. »

Avec plus de 230 millions d’utilisateurs de TikTok dans l’Union européenne, soit près de la moitié de la population, nous devrions commencer à chercher des solutions pour encourager les gouvernements des Etats membres ou même le Parlement européen à contrôler l’influence de l’application chinoise dans nos institutions.

Cela ne signifie pas que nous devions approuver une interdiction – après tout, à quoi servons-nous si notre réaction à l’interdiction par la Chine des réseaux sociaux occidentaux est de leur faire subir la même chose ? Cependant, les institutions de l’Union européenne doivent passer plus de temps à enquêter sur les actions de TikTok : si la plateforme viole les accords d’utilisation (qu’elle ne cesse de modifier) et utilise les données au-delà de ce qui est raisonnable à des fins de marketing, il faut instaurer une conversation sérieuse pour savoir si les promesses que la plateforme fait à ses utilisateurs sont frauduleuses ou non.

Lors d’un contrôle des services de TikTok, la CNIL a constaté que les services web de TikTok permettaient difficilement aux utilisateurs de refuser les cookies de suivi:

« La formation restreinte a considéré que rendre le mécanisme de refus plus complexe revient en réalité à décourager les utilisateurs de refuser les cookies et à les inciter à privilégier la facilité du bouton ‘Tout accepter’. 

Elle en a conclu que ce procédé portait atteinte à la liberté du consentement des internautes et constituait une violation de l’article 82 de la loi Informatique et Libertés puisqu’il n’était pas aussi simple de refuser les cookies que de les accepter au moment du contrôle en ligne de juin 2021 et jusqu’à la mise en place d’un bouton ‘Tout refuser’ en février 2022. »

Verdict : TikTok devra payer 5 M€ aux autorités françaises.

Deux enquêtes sur la protection de la vie privée menées à l’échelle de l’UE par le régulateur irlandais de la protection des données – l’une sur la sécurité des enfants et l’autre sur les transferts de données vers la Chine – progressent également. On verra ce que donnent ces enquêtes.

Ma recommandation personnelle : évitez d’utiliser TikTok.

Originally published here

The farming sector faces national security threats

The Biden administration has released an updated security memorandum, which outlines the threats to the American agricultural system, as well as ways to address them. “To achieve this, the Federal Government will identify and assess threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts from these high-consequence and catastrophic incidents – including but not limited to those presented by CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear) threats, climate change, and cybersecurity – and will prioritize resources to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk”, reads the document released last month.

The White House touches on an important topic by addressing the unique threats that face the farming sector, and to what extent the American food production system might be threatened by domestic or foreign actions. It addresses for instance, the impacts of toxic industrial chemicals, from a standpoint not only of the effects on humans, but also on the biological realm, which might impact the productivity of farms.

The memorandum comes at a time when supply chain disruptions have shown to consumers just to what extent a food system can destabilize the inner-workings of a country. Case in point, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not just a military conflict that plays out on the battlefield – it is also a war of food, in which the Russian war machine holds Ukrainian grain exports hostage through its strategic vantage points. Continuous grain deals in the Black Sea have stood on rocky grounds, despite the vital importance for the Ukrainian economy. This war underlines how civilian infrastructure quickly becomes a military target, and how guaranteeing security is not merely about anti-aircraft missiles, but also about protecting strategic industrial elements.

For that reason it is not just laudable that the administration addresses these risks, but also that USDA has been at the forefront of arguing for food security through innovation. The USDA’s Agriculture Innovation Agenda (AIA) advances the notion that more innovation, through public and private research and investment, makes the food system more efficient and sustainable. Compared to the European Union’s approach – which seeks to reduce farm land use and livestock, to the detriment of the European food sector – the AIA takes a forward-looking approach.

The White House touches on an important topic by addressing the unique threats that face the farming sector, and to what extent the American food production system might be threatened by domestic or foreign actions. It addresses for instance, the impacts of toxic industrial chemicals, from a standpoint not only of the effects on humans, but also on the biological realm, which might impact the productivity of farms.

The memorandum comes at a time when supply chain disruptions have shown to consumers just to what extent a food system can destabilize the inner-workings of a country. Case in point, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not just a military conflict that plays out on the battlefield – it is also a war of food, in which the Russian war machine holds Ukrainian grain exports hostage through its strategic vantage points. Continuous grain deals in the Black Sea have stood on rocky grounds, despite the vital importance for the Ukrainian economy. This war underlines how civilian infrastructure quickly becomes a military target, and how guaranteeing security is not merely about anti-aircraft missiles, but also about protecting strategic industrial elements.

For that reason it is not just laudable that the administration addresses these risks, but also that USDA has been at the forefront of arguing for food security through innovation. The USDA’s Agriculture Innovation Agenda (AIA) advances the notion that more innovation, through public and private research and investment, makes the food system more efficient and sustainable. Compared to the European Union’s approach – which seeks to reduce farm land use and livestock, to the detriment of the European food sector – the AIA takes a forward-looking approach.

Originally published here

Cukai Vape dan Industri Rokok Elektrik di Indonesia

Konsumsi vape atau rokok elektrik saat ini merupakan bagian dari keseharian banyak orang di seluruh dunia, termasuk juga di Indonesia. Kita, khususnya yang tinggal di wilayah urban dan perkotaan, dengan mudah bisa menemukan berbagai pengguna vape, dan juga toko-toko yang menjual berbagai produk rokok elektrik dengan berbagai varian merek dan model.

Fenomena banyaknya pengguna vape ini juga membawa pengaruh terhadap industri rokok elektrik di Indonesia. Saat ini misalnya, sudah ada sekitar 100.000 pekerja yang bekerja di industri vape dan rokok elektrik. Angka ini tentu merupakan jumlah yang tidak kecil, dan sangat layak untuk diperhatikan oleh para pembuat kebijakan, khususnya yang ingin meregulasi sektor industri tersebut (tribunnews.com, 13/6/2022).

Ada berbagai hal yang menjadi alasan para konsumen untuk mengkonsumsi dan menggunakan produk-produk vape. Salah satu alasan yang umum adalah, banyak para pengguna vape yang sebelumnya perokok aktif. Mereka menggunakan vape karena harganya yang lebih murah, dan juga karena kandungan vape yang lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar. Salah satu indikator yang dirasakan oleh beberapa konsumen setelah mereka berpindah dari konsumsi rokok menjadi vape adalah, mereka merasakan nafas yang lebih lega (tribunnews.com, 26/10/2022).

Vape atau rokok elektrik sebagai produk yang jauh lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar merupakan informasi yang didapatkan dari laporan lembaga-lemabga kesehatan internasional. 

Salah satunya adalah lembaga kesehatan publik asal Inggris, Public Health England (PHE), yang pada tahun 2015 lalu mengeluarkan laporan bahwa vape atau rokok elektrik merupakan produk yang 95% jauh lebih tidak berbahaya bila dibandingkan dengan rokok konvensional yang dibakar (gov.uk, 19/8/2015).

Hal ini dikarenakan, vape atau rokok elektrik tidak menghasilkan tar dan juga karbon monoksida, yang merupakan dua elemen paling berbahaya dari rokok konvensional yang dibakar. Oleh karena itu, para perokok yang biasanya mengkonsumsi rokok konvensional yang dibakar bisa menjadikan rokok elektirk atau vape sebagai alat untuk membantu mereka berhenti merokok (nhs.uk, 10/10/2022).

Sangat penting untuk dicatat bahwa, laporan dari PHE tersebut bukan berarti menyatakan bahwa vape atau rokok elektrik merupakan produk yang aman 100%. Seseorang yang sebelumnya tidak merokok memang akan jauh lebih baik bila mereka tidak menggunakan vape. Tetapi, bagi mereka yang sudah terlanjur menjadi perokok aktif dan mengalami kecanduan terhadap produk yang sangat berbahaya tersebut, vape merupakan produk yang sangat cocok untuk digunakan agar mereka bisa berhenti merokok.

Sudah menjadi rahasia umum bahwa, Indonesia merupakan salah satu negara dengan jumlah populasi perokok aktif terbesar di dunia. Pada tahun 2021 lalu misalnya, terdapat sekitar 69,1 juta penduduk Indonesia yang menjadi perokok aktif. Hal ini belum lagi para perokok pasif yang menghisap asap rokok di ruang-ruang publik (dinkes.jakarta.go.id, 3/6/2022).

Hal ini tentu merupakan hal yang sangat berbahaya dan sangat penitng untuk diatasi. Kita yang menjadi perokok aktif tentu mengetahui bahwa berhenti merokok merupakan hal yang tidak mudah. Untuk itu, adanya produk yang jauh lebih tidak berbahaya, seperti vape atau rokok elektrik, merupakan sesuatu yang cukup positif, dan bisa dimanfaatkan untuk membantu mereka yang saat ini menjadi konsumen rokok setiap hari selama bertahun-tahun.

Namun, saat ini, sepertinya menggunakan rokok elektrik atau vape sebagai produk yang bisa membantu perokok untuk berhenti merokok bukan hal yang menjadi perhatian para regulator dan pembuat kebijakan di Indonesia. Salah satunya adalah, beberapa waktu lalu misalnya, pemerintah memutuskan untuk meningkatan cukai rokok sebesar 15% per tahun selma 5 tahun dari tahun 2023 mendatang sampai tahun 2027 (cnbcindonesia.com, 4/11/2022).

Kebijakan ini sendiri mendapatkan keberatan bukan hanya dari para pelaku usaha industri rokok elektrik, namun juga dari pihak konsumen. Hal ini akan memberikan beban lebih kepada para perokok yang ingin menggunakan produk lain yang bisa membantu mereka berhenti merokok, karena harganya yang akan naik, khususnya para perokok yang termasuk dalam golongan ekonomi menengah ke bawah (tribunnews.com, 26/10/2022).

Selain itu, hal lain yang juga tidak kalah penting untuk diperhatikan bahwa, industri vape di Indonesia didominasi oleh para pelaku usaha mikro, kecil, dan menengah. Hal ini tentu sangat berbeda dengan industri rokok konvensional di Indonesia, yang saat ini didominasi oleh banyak perusahaan konglomerat besar (vapemagz.co.id, 17/9/2020).

Untuk itu, sangat penting bagi para pembuat kebijakan di Indonesia agar tidak membuat regulasi yang kontraproduktif terkait dengan upaya menanggulangi jumlah perokok yang ada di Indonesia. Inggris misalnya, merupakan salah satu negara yang secara resmi sudah memiliki kerangka kebijakan untuk menggunakan vape sebagai salah satu alat bagi para perokok untuk berhenti merokok (nhs.uk, 10/10/2022).

Semoga, kita bisa belajar dari negara-negara lain yang sudah memiliki kerangka kebijakan yang berfokus pada harm reduction seperti Inggris. Dengan demikian, diharapkan populasi perokok aktif di Indonesia dapat semakin berkurang drastis dari waktu ke waktu.

Originally published here

Fun Police

ConsEUmer Podcast

Consumer Choice Center Cast

Follow us

Facebook-f Twitter Instagram Linkedin Youtube Spotify

Contact Info

712 H St NE PMB 94982
Washington, DC 20002

info@consumerchoicecenter.org

© COPYRIGHT 2024, CONSUMER CHOICE CENTER

Scroll to top
en_USEN
it_ITIT pt_BRPT fr_FRFR es_ESES de_DEDE en_USEN