Vaping Risks Overstated: CAPHRA Calls For Science, Not Scare Tactics
Firstly, identifying thousands of compounds in vape aerosols is not unexpected. Modern laboratory analysis can detect trace chemicals at parts-per-billion levels—many of which are not proven to be harmful at the concentrations used in legal, regulated nicotine e liquids. According to Samsul Arrifin Kamal, of MOVE Malaysia 'Presence does not equate to risk, and suggesting otherwise misrepresents scientific principles.'
Critically, no credible study to date has shown that vaping is more harmful than smoking. In fact, leading independent reviews—including those by Public Health England and the UK Office for Health Improvement and Disparities—consistently conclude that vaping is significantly less harmful than combustible tobacco. Unlike cigarette smoke, which contains over 7,000 chemicals including dozens of known carcinogens, vape aerosols contain far fewer and at much lower levels.
Concerns about metals and volatile compounds should be addressed through proper regulation, not fear. Poorly manufactured or illicit devices pose real risks—this is why Malaysia's reintroduction of the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act (Act 852) was a necessary step. Enforcing product quality, ingredient transparency, and sales restrictions is the path forward.
The public deserves clear, science-led communication. Overstating the dangers of vaping can have unintended consequences by discouraging adults who smoke from switching to safer alternatives, or pushing vapers back to combustible tobacco.
Kamal further states, 'In short, vaping is not risk-free and should not be marketed to youth. But for adult smokers unable to quit nicotine entirely, switching to regulated vaping products remains a significantly less harmful choice.'
We urge policymakers, the media, and the public to focus on proportional regulation, product safety enforcement, and honest harm communication.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
Upholding Integrity: Call For Consistent Conflict Of Interest Standards In Public Health
As public health systems strive to address the global burden of smoking-related harm, calls are intensifying for more balanced and consistent application of conflict of interest standards in policymaking. Central to this discussion is Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), designed to insulate public health policy from tobacco industry influence. While its intent remains vital, growing concerns point to its uneven enforcement—particularly where consumer advocates are labeled unfairly, while other powerful stakeholders, including pharmaceutical and philanthropic interests, remain largely exempt from equivalent scrutiny. Many public health researchers and agencies receive funding from industries with vested interests in cessation products, raising questions about selective application of influence standards. Critics argue that this imbalance risks undermining public trust and marginalising grassroots voices essential to developing practical harm reduction solutions. 'The principle of integrity must be universally applied,' Clarisse Virgino, CAPHRA representative to the Philippines, argues. 'Transparency and accountability are essential—both in protecting public health and ensuring all credible voices are heard.' There is a growing consensus that consumer advocates, many with lived experience and deep commitment to harm reduction, deserve a seat at the table. Their contributions are seen as vital to ensuring public health policies remain grounded in science, not silenced by politics or commercial competition.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
New Report Reveals Systemic Breaches Of Fundamental Human Rights Obligations, Urges Urgent Tobacco Control Reform
The Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA) today released a comprehensive analysis entitled "The Right to Health and Public Health Policy," which exposes critical failures in global public health systems and highlights the urgent need for policy reform grounded in human rights principles. The report, authored by CAPHRA researchers C.Y. Virgino and N.E. Loucas, presents a damning assessment of how governments worldwide have systematically failed to uphold Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which guarantee every individual's right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental well-being. "Governments are demonstrating extraordinary hypocrisy in their approach to tobacco control," said Nancy Loucas, co-author of the report. "They simultaneously tax tobacco products, creating reliance on tobacco revenue, whilst claiming to fight tobacco use. Meanwhile, safer nicotine alternatives that could reduce harm—such as vaping and nicotine pouches—are often overregulated or banned outright, whilst combustible cigarettes remain widely available. This directly contradicts both the spirit of harm reduction and governments' obligations under Article 25 to reduce preventable illness." The analysis identifies how public health policy must encompass four core elements: availability of adequate healthcare facilities, accessibility without discrimination, cultural acceptability of services, and quality that meets scientific and medical standards. However, the reality falls far short of these requirements. "We're witnessing systemic failures across multiple fronts," explained Clarisse Virgino, the report's co-author. "Chronic underfunding of public health systems persists, with governments allocating disproportionately low budgets to preventive care despite clear evidence of cost-effectiveness. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep gaps in preparedness and equitable vaccine distribution, whilst many stakeholders promote 'pay for play' health policies that prioritise appearances over sustainable, inclusive policy development." Virgino emphasised that these policies frequently fail to address core public health issues effectively, instead serving to generate favourable public perception for benefactors whilst perpetuating systems that continue to contribute to harm. The report concludes with a powerful call for reform, with both authors stressing that upholding the right to health represents both a legal obligation and moral imperative. "Without genuine accountability, transparency, and a renewed focus on the core values of human rights and harm reduction, these failures will persist and exacerbate global health inequalities," said Loucas. "The challenge for governments and international bodies is to continuously align policies with this essential human rights framework. Upholding the right to health demands courageous, accountable leadership to dismantle systemic inequities and build a future where health is a guarantee, not a privilege."
Scoop
28-07-2025
- Scoop
Vaping Risks Overstated: CAPHRA Calls For Science, Not Scare Tactics
In response to the article published by The Sun Malaysia titled 'Many harmful chemicals found in vape liquids', CAPHRA welcomes continued scrutiny of all nicotine delivery systems. However, it is essential that reporting is balanced, evidence-based, and accurately contextualized. Firstly, identifying thousands of compounds in vape aerosols is not unexpected. Modern laboratory analysis can detect trace chemicals at parts-per-billion levels—many of which are not proven to be harmful at the concentrations used in legal, regulated nicotine e liquids. According to Samsul Arrifin Kamal, of MOVE Malaysia 'Presence does not equate to risk, and suggesting otherwise misrepresents scientific principles.' Critically, no credible study to date has shown that vaping is more harmful than smoking. In fact, leading independent reviews—including those by Public Health England and the UK Office for Health Improvement and Disparities—consistently conclude that vaping is significantly less harmful than combustible tobacco. Unlike cigarette smoke, which contains over 7,000 chemicals including dozens of known carcinogens, vape aerosols contain far fewer and at much lower levels. Concerns about metals and volatile compounds should be addressed through proper regulation, not fear. Poorly manufactured or illicit devices pose real risks—this is why Malaysia's reintroduction of the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act (Act 852) was a necessary step. Enforcing product quality, ingredient transparency, and sales restrictions is the path forward. The public deserves clear, science-led communication. Overstating the dangers of vaping can have unintended consequences by discouraging adults who smoke from switching to safer alternatives, or pushing vapers back to combustible tobacco. Kamal further states, 'In short, vaping is not risk-free and should not be marketed to youth. But for adult smokers unable to quit nicotine entirely, switching to regulated vaping products remains a significantly less harmful choice.' We urge policymakers, the media, and the public to focus on proportional regulation, product safety enforcement, and honest harm communication.
