Freelance journalist John Lund took the pulse of Vejpkollen's editor and founder Stefan Mathisson after his trip to Panama and the WHO's tobacco convention in February 2024. What really happened down there, how does it affect Sweden and why do you go around the world to get involved in something as strange as e-cigarettes?
Traveling halfway across the world to get involved with a... product? Vejpkollen Editor-in-Chief and Founder Stefan Mathisson embarked on the long flight from Gothenburg to Panama City for a week of activity and anti-activity, focused around nicotine products and the fight to save them, or to crush them. At the center was WHO COP10 meeting on tobacco controll, which took place on February 5-10 this year, but also an alternative conference, called "Good COP".
State of play for Panama
The World Health Organization's COP10 meeting, or 'Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control', did not attract much attention in the mainstream media. But there were many items on the agenda, not least questions about 'novel nicotine products' - which the WHO wants to put on an equal footing with regular cigarettes and other combustible tobacco. Among other things, it wants to banning flavors, banning open systems, develop a universal standard model of e-cigarette with a mechanism that shuts down after a certain number of puffs, redefine vapor from e-cigarettes as tobacco smoke, put a tax burden on new nicotine products on par with regular cigarettes, define anyone who vejps or snuffs as a smoker who has failed to quit and, finally, ban everything and aim for a "nicotine-free" world.
An alternative conference
"Tobacco harm reduction" is not on the map - that phrase is considered a fabrication by the tobacco industry, "Big Tobacco", to "lure future generations into a lifelong addiction". Anyone who disagrees is welcome to join in, so the prevailing agenda is fairly unchallenged. In contrast, and in parallel to COP10, the US-based Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) organized a "counter-conference", sometimes referred to as the "Good COP", with panels where everyone was welcome to participate, experts, users, activists and others. Stefan Mathisson, editor and reporter at Vejpkollen, was one of the participants.
Did you have a packed schedule?
"There was hardly any time left to see the country itself, you could say. The Panama Canal, on the other hand, is a bit like a port in Gothenburg, but a bit bigger of course. And it's 40 degrees instead of just two in February."
Was it the TPA program that you followed?
"They had a program and with many people I have met at other conferences. I followed their program and attended the panels, but I want to see as many sides as possible. That's the goal I have with Vejpkollen, to try to unpack what this discussion is about and try to show as clearly as possible who is involved in this debate about e-cigarettes and snus and nicotine and harm reduction and what the interests are and that everything is not black and white, and to talk to as many people as you can - otherwise it would have been quite boring to go. So the first thing I did was to go to the conference center where COP10 was taking place. There I ran into various activists, anti-tobacco and anti-vape people who I tried to talk to, but they didn't want to talk to anyone who wasn't in the room itself, where only the authorized people were allowed. However, they filmed us, the journalists who were outside."
Did they film you to document various "suspicious" individuals?
"I think so, actually. These groups work a bit like that. The anti-tobacco movements are a story in themselves. It's pure war. The Antifa movement and the right-wing extremist groups work in exactly the same way, I have observed. Very tough and very threatening. This gang was quite overage in age but they behaved more like children. They came from Mexico in particular, quite a large group with placards saying "Stop Big Tobacco and "Ban vaping" and pictures of crossed out e-cigarettes. It was interesting to see up close. And while this group was demonstrating, there was also a group of tobacco farmers counter-demonstrating and also cigar manufacturers, both of whom believe that their activities do not belong in the tobacco convention because they have nothing to do with cigarettes. They were also not allowed to enter the conference. And then there was a Spanish vape and harm reduction activist, Julio Ruades, whom I interviewed, who actually managed to get into the entrance hall. His YouTube channel has half a million followers. Quite quickly he had to leave again, escorted by guards. I was also interested in the situation in Panama itself, their regulations and such. Panama has banned the sale of all e-cigarettes and also raised taxes on cigarettes. In any case, it was very easy to get e-cigarettes. I talked to people from the local vape organization, who have filed a lawsuit against the state because they believe this ban is unconstitutional.
Then I was listening to most of the "The 'Good COP' panels, which took place every evening, and got hold of various participants with whom I also conducted interviews."
Were there many of you traveling journalists?
"Quite a few, who like me had come there to see what it was all about. Many knew very little, or nothing about what e-cigarettes really are or the difference between smoking and vejpa, or even snus or nicotine pouches. It actually became a whole separate section of my journey, explaining to other journalists what this is actually about, being both a journalist and an activist at the same time."
It is remarkable to have been given this task, and at the same time lack the most basic knowledge, one might think?
"You might think so. But it is frighteningly common. Even in Sweden. I am not surprised. The media coverage around e-cigarettes and harm reduction is very poor in the broader media and below criticism."
Did you watch any of the streamed broadcasts from the COP10 meeting and what were your impressions?
"I did. The first session was supposed to be broadcast live but there was some technical glitch so they only posted a small part. But the "Good COP" people managed to get hold of the whole session in the end and got it online pretty much immediately. It was interesting to see the different nations' statements on tobacco and nicotine. There was some really angry rhetoric from The Netherlands, which wants to ban pretty much everything related to alternative nicotine products. China has been praised for its efforts to reduce smoking, while state-owned tobacco companies account for half of all tobacco sold in the world - and the country is the world's largest producer of vejp products.
What was the atmosphere at the meeting?
It should not be forgotten that the WHO has taken a hugely aggressive negative stance on e-cigarettes for some years now. They advocate a ban, preferably a total ban, they say that it is not possible to stop using e-cigarettes because there is no evidence. There is a very aggressive mood.
What did the different delegates say about harm reduction and vejpning?
Of course, I was particularly curious about Sthe united kingdom, New Zealand and Philippines, all of which have quite progressive legislation around alternative nicotine products and what they would say, or dare to say. And what would Sweden say, if they were to make a special statement? But they chose not to. Instead, they let the EU make a collective statement."
It seems rather remarkable to avoid making any statement at all, in the light of the international attention Sweden is currently receiving - including from established scientists - because of its low smoking rate and the availability of snus - and the fact that these two factors influence each other. It speaks of a country where harm reduction actually works, and is encouraged by the system. 'The Swedish Experience' is a phrase that may be becoming as well known as 'The Swedish Model' was in the 20th century, with its middle ground between socialism and capitalism. There has been more talk about snus than ever in the last ten years, it seems. Sweden should almost have felt compelled to make some kind of statement on the matter - not least in these times.
"You might think so. But much of this discussion is completely untouchable - because Swedish snus, with its prevalence in a country with very low smoking and smoking disease statistics, is sold by a tobacco company, Swedish Match. It is now also, in fact, Swedish Match that has coined the expression "The Swedish Experience". Therefore, such a discussion is completely untenable in the WHO context, when the link to a tobacco company is so clear. I myself therefore believe that it would not be possible to stand up and say anything about it at all. At the same time, it is true that the proportion of smokers in Sweden is very low, statistically speaking, but that smokeless tobacco and nicotine have increased. The link is clear. And the Swedes could actually have pointed that out. It's also worth mentioning that we have pretty tough laws on tobacco and nicotine across the board, but we allow everything on the market and let individual companies control how sales look in stores. And you might think that the Swedish delegation would talk about this, but at least I myself did not expect them to actually do so. Instead, it will be the politicians' job to speak up for the Swedish model in this area."
How to explain to others how things work in Sweden?
"I was recently visited by a Brazilian harm reduction activist from Brazil, who had come to Sweden to see what we were doing and what it looked like, this "The Swedish Experience". "Who should I talk to?" she asked. "I know something even better than talking," I said, and took her to the first press agency and looked at their display of nicotine products. In Sweden, cigarettes are barely visible anymore. Instead you see snus, and more and more lately, e-cigarettes. Somewhere it manifests a will on the part of the store that they simply don't want to sell cigarettes anymore."
Moreover, not based on political decisions, but on reason and the principle of natural selection. To the annoyance of those who insist on political interference in time and even out of time, possibly. Did you have contact with any of the Swedish delegation, either during the conference or before, back in Sweden?
"I did. I found out who was included and did an interview with the head of the delegation, Paula Ericson, who is an expert at the Ministry of Social Affairs. She was very quiet and would not and must not say anything about anything. Sweden would hold the EU positionwas the message. I asked for the documents that were available, and when I received them, most of them were crossed out with black confidentiality markings. However, I spoke to many politicians before the trip, and today you love to talk about harm reductionAt least from the right, where this model has been embraced as a political force. They have realized that snus and smoke-free nicotine are important to people. Even Social Democrats, who were very prohibitionist at home last year, have stood up for snus and nicotine pouches in the EU. So politicians are happy to talk, while officials are more reticent."
Then there is the lobby against nicotine, both in smoked tobacco form and in all other forms. We sometimes hear from this quarter that Sweden has endorsed the World Health Organization's Convention on Tobacco Control and should therefore introduce the rules applicable to this Convention. This can sometimes sound almost binding or obligatory, but is it really?
"For example. Public Health Agency of Sweden is very careful to point this out, yes. It's a recurring slogan to convince politicians to do what you think is right - and also to stay relevant and funded - but you should never forget that it's a recommendation, even if it looks bad not to follow it. Maybe not so much for a country like Sweden, compared to a country without a clear regulatory profile. Harm minimization is actually included in WHO internships as a possible tool, that should not be forgotten, after all."
It sounds a bit like a church, that COP10 meeting, with various strict "decrees". The church once had power but does not have it today, at least in a modern country like Sweden. Can we take some of what has been said with a pinch of salt, at least in the real world?
"That is probably true to some extent. If you go to the national level in the respective countries, a lot depends on how knowledgeable the politicians actually are on the issue, and who is in the majority. Don't forget that it was a taste ban on the agenda in Sweden only a year and a half ago, and even then the WHO and the Framework Convention came up for discussion. Some countries, like The Netherlands and Denmark, "Strangely enough, two countries that are quite 'liberated' in some areas, have both voted through taste bans. The difference is probably that Sweden has politicians who have understood this with harm minimization and sat on the other side."
Did anyone actually address harm reduction at COP10 in Panama? Sweden did not and the UK is said to have avoided talking about its open approach to e-cigarettes, much to the disappointment of many. Was there anyone who dared to try to hammer on the WHO's massive wall of resistance?
"New Zealand, which has halved their smoking since they started advocating e-cigarettes, at least almost saying so, but avoiding the word "e-cigarettes" in favor of "evidence-based harm reduction approaches". In reality, they have been running government campaigns to get people to stop smoking using e-cigarettes. Most notably, St. Kitts and Nevis, a small country in the Caribbean, took the opportunity to say that they didn't think we should just talk about banning e-cigarettes and smokeless nicotine, but instead have a reasoned discussion, and that we should create a working group to talk about harm reduction. Which also seems to be happening. And which also led to the fact that there was not a single consensus decision on e-cigarettes or snus or nicotine pouches this time and that everything will be postponed to the next meeting in two years. Because of this small country. A big country probably wouldn't get away with this, they'd be too scared to. And both St Kitts and also the Philippines, who were also saying positive things about harm reduction, were really put down by the anti-organizations, who were also there, and told that they were doing the bidding of the tobacco companies. It is important to remember that the people running these activities are not health experts but opinion leaders with one message: that the tobacco industry is there for the taking. And everything they touch is pure evil. I perceived a very tense atmosphere in the room."
What do you think and feel about the future of e-cigarettes and other smokeless nicotine products?
"I actually think that something can happen within the WHO given that many countries have actually realized that harm reduction for smokers is not a joke. And you can actually thank the tobacco companies for lobbying on the issue of being able to sell a new product instead of cigarettes. It has created a breeding ground for us users of alternative nicotine products that no one usually listens to but which, over time, is considered to be able to add something to the discussion. The WHO will certainly continue with its hard line and crusadeat least until the funding starts to fall into place. But most importantly, we have a situation in the world, not least in Sweden, where this has become a bit too big to fail. We have reached a kind of critical mass now, when so many people are using these products, and to suddenly start whining about bans is simply not going to work. More and more, there will be a demand for a change in attitude about these things, and when politicians hear more and more from those of us who want to get rid of cigarettes through the new products, good things will happen, I'm convinced of that."
Do you have any good memories of your own to take with you from the trip?
"Absolutely. Especially nice was a consideration that Bengt Hedlund did. Bengt is the editor and CEO of Convenience Stores Sweden, a knowledge center for retailers, wholesalers and suppliers in Sweden and was also on site, we traveled down together. When we have TPA panel discussions, there were some people I already knew from other contexts and conferences, and I was talking to an Indian doctor about some new technology and we both filled in different places and the conversation was in full swing. And then Bengt says: "This is fantastic. You come from completely different parts of the world. And you're coming together around... a product, which obviously means a lot to both of you, and which you're now traveling halfway around the world to get involved with." That's pretty strong. This is a movement. It is global. It's not going to go away. It's not paid for by the tobacco industry. This is about people."
"Another fun thing is to look in the duty-free shops and see what is and isn't available. Liquor and cigarettes are always there, and perfumes. But nowadays there are also some brands of e-cigarettes. Admittedly, these are mainly products from the big tobacco companies, but it's still exciting. Something has happened here. It would have been impossible just ten years ago. It's a great trend."
I have started using e-cigarettes so as not to disturb others and not to litter. It can't be enough. I want to take control of my health.