Garrett McGovern, medical director at Dublin’s Priority Medical Clinic has acquired a reputation as a heavyweight in the scene of tobacco-control public policy. The King’s College London graduate argues that e-cigarettes and other alternative products are not mere gadgets but genuine cessation tools.
Mr McGovern’s forthright advocacy, honed at the E-Cigarette Summit UK panel and public-health policy briefings, has placed him at the heart of a debate pitting harm reduction against prohibition. The debate has heated up since EU Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi equated—controversially, to say the least—the use of alternative nicotine products with smoking. Mr McGovern spoke to EU Perspectives to discuss nicotine policy and complex regulatory nuances.
You initiated the recent letter from scientists to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen challenging statements by Commissioner Várhelyi. What motivated you to take this step? Why did you feel it was important to respond publicly at this moment?
As advocates for ease of access to safer nicotine products we are used to firefighting misinformation and disinformation on a regular basis. E-cigarettes, and indeed all form of non combustible nicotine delivery, are under huge threat from over-regulation in many jurisdictions. The EU consists of an important and influential group of politicians from 27 countries.
It is imperative that each of these politicians takes tobacco harm reduction seriously and speaks the truth about safer nicotine products. Commissioner Várhelyi’s statements were so wide off the mark that we felt impelled to write to President von der Leyen and express our gravest concerns in the hope that the record would be set straight.
From the perspective of addiction medicine, why can harm-reduction approaches be an effective way to combat smoking? Based on your clinical experience, what role can less harmful nicotine alternatives play for smokers who struggle to quit?
Safer nicotine products are a very effective off-ramp from smoking and this is supported by the research literature. These products are immeasurably safer than smoking, which is responsible for numerous health conditions worldwide and which kills eight million people annually. In simple terms, it is a no-brainer to encourage smokers to switch to these products. It will prolong countless lives.
The European Commission is now preparing a revision of the Tobacco Products Directive. From the perspective of addiction medicine and public health, what should European policymakers prioritise if they genuinely want to reduce smoking-related disease and protect the health of EU citizens?
I would urge the commission to follow the evidence and regulate safer nicotine products proportionately. Keep them as a consumer product and do not limit flavour options. Flavours are a key reason why smokers find these products attractive. To ban them will probably obliterate the regulated e-cigarette market and hand the product over to dangerous cartels and all the dangers that an illicit market entails.
Yes, people below the age of 18 use e-cigarettes but it could be argued, convincingly I believe, that adolescents are exposed to far less harm using these products than they would be smoking. In the vast majority of cases youth use is infrequent and unproblematic and certainly nowhere near an epidemic as the media and many people in public health and tobacco control would have us believe.
I also believe that banning disposables is a big mistake. They are a popular and convenient product and have helped millions of smokers quit.
