By Antonella Marty, Argentine author and political scientist, and a Latin American fellow at the Consumer Choice Center.
Twenty years ago, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was a groundbreaking tool that pushed smoking to the forefront of the global health agenda. Today, the FCTC remains a crucial international tool, but science and society have moved on, and if it truly aims to keep saving lives, it needs to adapt. As the FCTC marks 20 years, its outdated approach ignores some harm-reduction tools like vaping.
Smoking is still one of the biggest drivers of preventable death worldwide. It is linked to six of the eight leading causes of mortality, including lung cancer, COPD, and cardiovascular disease. According to the most recent global estimates, tobacco use causes more than eight million deaths each year, with about one in five tied directly to heart disease. The good news is that quitting smoking has an almost immediate impact: cardiovascular risks drop by half within just a few years of quitting.
But the conversation today cannot stop at simply urging people to quit. Not everyone can, or will, stop using nicotine overnight. That’s why harm reduction strategies have gained traction in public health discussions. The World Vapers’ Alliance has worked on a report, “Rethinking Tobacco Control: 20 Harm-Reduction Lessons The FCTC Should Take Note Of,” to highlight these challenges and opportunities. The recent report offers 20 clear lessons: countries that have embraced flexible, data-driven, and people-centered approaches are seeing the most impressive declines in smoking rates. Sweden, New Zealand, and the UK have all drastically reduced smoking by making room for alternatives like vaping or nicotine pouches.
Unfortunately, many governments still take the opposite route. In Latin America, countries like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Suriname maintain outright bans on e-cigarettes. Mexico’s prohibition, in place since 2022, has only pushed vaping into an unregulated and dangerous black market. Panama has gone even further by banning heated tobacco too, sparking court battles over consumer rights. Meanwhile, Peru faces a patchwork of legal loopholes that leave consumers exposed, and only recently did Colombia move toward a balanced regulatory framework. Even in Spain, the government has introduced special taxes on vaping and is considering restrictions on flavors, effectively treating these products the same as traditional cigarettes. While these measures might be well intentioned, they risk limiting less harmful options for people trying to quit smoking.
Prohibiting flavors or restricting access to harm reduction technologies under the banner of protecting youth may sound noble, but in practice, it penalizes millions of adults, particularly the most vulnerable. Instead of lowering harm, these policies often end up widening health inequalities. A better approach is to focus on education and awareness campaigns targeted at young people, helping prevent initiation and access to nicotine products.
The FCTC should be modernized. Reform is about putting people first, focusing on real-world outcomes rather than rigid orthodoxy. Public health cannot afford to ignore national contexts. Groups like the World Vapers’ Alliance, which brings together more than 150,000 consumers and advocacy organizations worldwide, have been calling for precisely this: an approach grounded in evidence and individual rights. In Argentina, for instance, WVA has been pushing for the government to take action and update long-standing restrictions that no longer align with current science, but there is a lack of political will from the government to make any changes.
Every country has the right to chart its own course toward a smoke-free future. Lives are saved by inclusive, realistic policies that allow people to make informed choices. If the FCTC wants to stay relevant for the next twenty years, it must embrace a future where people have more options, more freedom, and ultimately, better health.
