Recently, Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, has published a study paper in which its authors describe the importance of competition as a transforming method in the nicotine product market by analyzing the behavior of cigarette companies in the United States during the progressive insertion of innovative low-risk nicotine products that, among other things, tend to displace the consumption of conventional cigarettes.
As we know, the effect of nicotine on smokers is addictive. They inhale it through tobacco combustion, allowing the nicotine to rush to their lungs, arterial blood, and brain, where the addictive effects are generated immediately. As mentioned by experts -with special and affectionate mention to Dr. Diego Verrastro (MD)- there is no more effective parenteral route, in the case of drug administration, than the one that takes place towards the lungs during respiratory inhalation, being this even more imminent than the sublingual route. Of course, nicotine’s effect on cigarette smoking is identical and favors the propensity to dependence.
Nicotine, provided in low quantities, stimulates and acts on adrenaline and dopamine, sharpening people’s concentration and memory. To examine an example of its effect, we could reference the contemporary updating of the entertaining enterprises of the mythical and eccentric English private detective of the late 19th century, Sherlock Holmes. In the television series put together by the British Broadcasting Corporation, the legendary agent, created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, has given up smoking. However, in this revamped version, he retains his nicotine addiction. Furthermore, he attaches nicotine patches to his forearm to cope with his dependence, claiming that the chemical substance enables him to reason and reflect better.
As we can see in the allusion to the popular series starring Benedict Cumberbatch, the paradigm of nicotine consumption has been changing for those who have a psychological and even physiological dependence on the element for a couple of decades. This phenomenon is gradually revolutionizing the market that supplies it, promoting access to alternatives to traditional tobacco combustion among consumers. This, for example, satisfied smokers’ nicotine cravings when tobacco consumption was restricted to their workplaces or specific spaces, in addition to the main incentive of its lower cost compared to cigarettes.
Due to this introduction of innovative solutions by independent operators in the conventional retail trade, there eventually arose, naturally, a competitive environment for profitability in which cigarette companies – which, despite the evidence, initially omitted the health risks of their products – began to imitate and trade such preferences, siding with non-combustible alternatives, innovation, and an appropriate regulatory framework.
Undoubtedly, the positive is that such novel options manifest themselves in products focused on risk and harm reduction, and the evidence is provided by the references of Levy et al. Both studies and recent industry reports indicate that smoking prevalence has declined at a much greater rate since nicotine vape products became widely available in 2012.
The downside, however, is that the main challenge to these solutions is the often biased and uninformed government regulations and bans that, as the prestigious document mentions, limit competition from independent firms that both propel and protect – although this is not their purpose – the profits of traditional cigarette companies. At the same time, they promote the slowing and even reversal of progress in reducing smoking, especially among youth and young adults. Not to mention the disincentive for tobacco companies that have jumped on the bandwagon of inventiveness to promote changes for public health.
As the article mentions, from a profit maximization perspective, the importance of non-combustible nicotine delivery products to tobacco companies is supported by evidence of i. changes in tobacco and vapor consumption; and ii—the impact of vape growth on cigarette stock prices.
In this regard, the recently launched “Effective Anti-Smoking Policies Global Index,” published by the international network We Are Innovation, analyzes public policies to eradicate smoking in 59 countries, evaluated in 10 objective categories such as the regulatory framework for Nicotine Non-Combusted Nicotine Products (NCNP), prohibition, display, packaging, and taxation, among others. The Index demonstrates that vaping and other non-combustion products can have a positive impact worldwide. It also provides global examples and a roadmap on what public policies are conducive to harnessing the benefits of these innovative products.
Despite the abundant evidence, however, and given that cigarettes are an old and very lucrative source of revenue, tobacco companies are always tempted to preserve the traditional habit, especially if their alternative is commercially unviable or inconvenient unless there are financial imperatives to promote potentially harm-reducing products.
A regulation can act as a barrier to entry that reduces competition, thereby reducing incentives for cigarette companies to invest in non-combustible nicotine delivery products, invariably delaying progress against smoking.
* José Alberto León is Project Director at Fundación Internacional Bases, as well as Senior Fellow at the think tanks CEDICE Libertad and Fundación Ciudadano Austral. Previously, research and content assistant at Fundación Para el Progreso. Co-author of the book “Después del Socialismo, Libertad.” He studied law at Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Source: We Are Innovation
