Criticism of the EU Commission over the public consultation on tobacco: “Impossible by design”

Brussels – The European Commission’s pubblic consultation published on 22 May 2026, which aims to guide future regulation of tobacco and nicotine products, has been heavily criticised by
ETHRA (European Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates) as “impossible to answer” for anyone with an “understanding of the differences in risk between the various products and a rational interest in public health.” Damian Sweeney, a partner at ETHRA, does not mince his words: “The questionnaire lumps all nicotine and tobacco products together as if they posed the same level of risk, making it impossible to answer in a meaningful way.”

According to Sweeney, the fundamental problem lies in the survey’s “risk-blind” approach. “It distorts the market simply by lumping all products together as if they all carried the same level of risk, which we know for certain is not the case.” This aggregation ignores differences in risk that can be “two orders of magnitude” between the most and least dangerous products. The intent is clear: “The design appears less like an open consultation and more like a path towards a pre-selected conclusion: more restrictions, more bans, and greater regulatory control over all nicotine-based products.”

In its report, ETHRA warns that strict regulations, such as flavour bans or nicotine limits, can have serious “unintended consequences.” Sweeney explains that “smokers and ex-smokers lose access to products that have helped them move away from cigarettes.” The evidence is clear: “In every country or jurisdiction that has introduced flavour bans, we have seen the same thing happen. The market shifts from being legal and regulated to illegal and unregulated; the black market flourishes, smoking prevalence stagnates or increases (among both adults and young people), and businesses close.”

The criticism also extends to the failure to take into account the trade-offs between the interests of young people and those of the EU’s 94 million adult smokers. “The population at risk is older people who smoke, so any move to restrict access to products that can help people quit smoking will be a negative for public health,” says Sweeney. A serious policy should ask: “How can we prevent youth use while maximising the number of adults who switch from smoking?”

Finally, the ETHRA report argues that existing measures, such as the 1992 ban on snus and restrictions on communicating the associated risks, are “unequivocally harmful” and effectively protect the cigarette trade. “They protect the cigarette trade by preventing accurate risk communication to people who smoke and who could significantly improve their health by switching to a safer nicotine product,” concludes Sweeney, citing the success of Sweden, where the smoking prevalence is 3.7 per cent compared to the EU average of 24 per cent, thanks in part to snus.

To further complicate the picture of the European consultation, allegations have emerged that tobacco groups are using artificial intelligence to manipulate the process. With over 33,000 responses already submitted, companies such as Philip Morris and British American Tobacco, along with the
Clearing the Air website  , have launched campaigns to encourage consumers to participate. Part of this effort relies on AI-assisted tools, which help users generate responses. For example, in Philip Morris shops, customers are directed via QR codes to an online platform offering dozens of suggested talking points, most of which oppose stricter restrictions on flavours, nicotine pouches, and filters, or warn of the growth of illicit trade.

This practice has drawn criticism from public health campaigners. Green MEP Tilly Metz warned that “automated submissions were distorting the consultation process.” Doctors and health insurers have filed a lawsuit against Philip Morris’s campaign, accusing it of being “misleading and manipulative.” Hans Snijder, director of Smoke-Free Generation, described the campaign as “an orchestrated lobbying effort.”

Philip Morris International has defended its position, stating that the legal action is “an attempt to discredit the consultation process itself” and that critics are seeking to “silence the voices of European citizens.” The company stated that its campaign was designed to facilitate individual engagement in EU policy-making. The consultation, which has attracted over 40,000 contributions, will close next week, with industry-supported digital tools having contributed significantly to the volume of responses. According to Massimo Andolina, President of the European Region, describing a tool that facilitates democratic participation as “manipulative” amounts to questioning the right of a legitimate part of the debate to make its voice heard.