Why Do Countries Have Different Attitudes Toward E-cigarettes?

Since e-cigarettes are so much less harmful than cigarettes, why do Hong Kong and China has to ban e-cigarettes completely?

2018 in Hong Kong, Chief Executive Carrie Lam said in her policy address that Hong Kong would ban e-cigarettes. And there are reports that the medical profession in Hong Kong has long since called for a ban on e-cigarettes and also set up a powerful coalition to ban e-cigarettes, urging the SAR government to ban emerging tobacco products such as e-cigarettes and heated cigarettes as soon as possible.

This policy is a big hit to the vaping industry. In the past, the vape manufacturers or wholesalers usually exported e-cigarettes from mainland China via Hong Kong, and the quantity was huge. The total ban on e-cigarettes in Hong Kong has made it more challenging to ship e-cigarettes, and the shipping cost has increased sharply.

This news may be the direct cause of many people talking about e-cigarettes recently. Electronic cigarettes are indeed hazardous to health, and it is also true that Hong Kong banned e-cigarettes. In addition, Hong Kong, Singapore, Brazil, the Philippines, and other 16 countries have also banned the sale of electronic cigarettes. But the strange thing is that the medical level of more than Hong Kong, the United States, Britain, France, and other countries have not banned e-cigarettes.

Many studies have shown that e-cigarettes are indeed a healthier alternative to cigarettes. Then why do these countries have different attitudes toward vaping? The answer is simple: the development of public health policy must weigh the pros and cons as the situation of each country is totally different.

The premise of Hong Kong’s total ban on e-cigarettes is that it leads the world in tobacco control policies. Data show that from the birth of Hong Kong’s first anti-smoking legislation in 1982 to the amendment of the Smoking (Public Health) Ordinance in 2012, where there is a ceiling where no smoking is allowed, the proportion of smokers in Hong Kong over the age of 15 has now been controlled to less than 10%. The ratio of young people between 15 and 19 smoking has fallen to 1%, far exceeding the level of tobacco control in Europe and the United States. The harm of cigarettes to public health in Hong Kong has been very effectively controlled.

Under this premise, although the harm of e-cigarettes is far less than cigarettes because the number of smokers is already tiny, their role in reducing the proportion of smokers in the population is insignificant. Still, it may cause young people to be induced, so a total ban is the most in the interests of the majority of the choice.

In countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States, the proportion of smokers is much higher; e-cigarettes harm far less than regular cigarettes. Reducing the number of smokers and significantly reducing the harm of passive smoking have a clear role. So, although the FDA has introduced control measures for e-cigarettes, but never mentioned a total ban.

It is worth mentioning that, although the Hong Kong medical community’s initiative to emphasize the harm reduction of e-cigarettes, no one has ever said e-cigarettes are more harmful than cigarettes.