An open letter to the European Commission advocating a more flexible tax policy for tobacco alternatives brings to light a long list of doctors and scientists who allowed themselves to be used for the nicotine lobby. Lobby vehicle EU Reporter is the messenger.

By the web editors

The international nicotine lobby managed to get no fewer than 83 doctors and scientists to sign an open letter to the European Commission on harm reduction. The letter, which was published on the EU Reporter website on September 1st, argues for European policy that encourages rather than discourages the switch from cigarettes to supposedly less harmful alternatives such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and nicotine pouches. The letter protests a plan by the European Commission to align the excise duty on these alternative nicotine products with traditional tobacco. In this way, the lobby is trying to influence the upcoming revisions of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and Tobacco Excise Directive (TED).

The long list of physicians and scientists from all parts of the world as well as references to scientific ‘evidence’ should give the letter the character of independence. However, nothing could be further from the truth. The initiative for the letter was  taken by cardiologist Konstantinos Farsalinos, a well-known advocate of harm reduction, according to EU Reporter. In a recent interview on the Romanian website Digi24, which states that it was paid for by Philip Morris International (PMI), Farsalinos gives the tobacco lobby’s consistent arguments for harm reduction. Under the headline ‘Myths about nicotine and the lack of dialogue with the public, major obstacles to tobacco control’, Farsalinos argues that it is not the nicotine that makes cigarettes harmful, but the tar from combustion, and that consumers should be able to access science-based information about less harmful alternatives to cigarettes.

In 2020, Farsalinos, together with immunologist Jacques Le Houezec and Professor of Public Health Anastasia Barbouni, both also signatories of the open letter, authored an article in which the hypothesis was raised that smoking would help against Covid-19.

Advisor to tobacco industry

On the list of signatories, we come across more well-known names. Like Karl Fagerström, who was announced as a speaker at a lobby meeting by Business Sweden in Nieuwspoort, a press centre in the Dutch parliament, about harm reduction, which after timely intervention by Youth Smoking Prevention and Health Funds for a Smoke-Free Netherlands did not take place. For that meeting, Fagerström was announced as a clinical psychologist and nicotine and tobacco researcher who was awarded the World Health Organization Medal in 1999 for outstanding work in tobacco control. That left unmentioned Fagerström was paid by Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT) for help in the development of tobacco alternatives and that in any case in 2018 he was associated as an advisor to the largest Swedish snus company Swedish Match, which in 2022 was acquired by Philip Morris.

GP gave vape recipes unseen

Another signatory is Australian GP Carolyn Beaumont, who was discredited last year  because she opened a website where, without consultation, people could easily get a prescription to buy vapes. It also came to light that she provided information about vapes in schools, while she received money from the tobacco industry as well.

Spanish surgeon praises ‘Swedish success’

Another name that raises many questions is that of Fernando Fernández Bueno, oncological surgeon and professor at the University of Alcalá de Henares in Madrid. Fernández is a co-founder of the International Association on Smoking Control and Harm Reduction (SCOHRE) and of the Spanish Medical Platform for Tobacco Harm Reduction (PRDT). Both organizations are co-senders of the letter.

As a spokesperson for the latter organization, Fernández participated in a meeting in the European Parliament in 2023 organized by the British magazine The Parliament. The meeting ‘Shaping Europe’s Beating Cancer Agenda: Science, Policy, and Innovation’ was sponsored by two libertarian organizations, the Greek European Expression (Evropaiki Ekfrasi) and the Italian Instituto Bruno Leoni. Fernández, in the presence of several MEPs, made a plea for the promotion of e-cigarettes as a less harmful alternative to cigarettes. He referred to the Swedish ‘success story’, a fixed argument of the harm reduction lobby in which the low smoking percentage in Sweden is linked to e-cigarette and snus use. In addition, he called for a revision of the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), because it is considered too stubborn in its commitment to combating all nicotine products.

Organizations of vapers and industry

In addition to SCOHRE and PRDT, the open letter is also endorsed by European Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (ETHRA), a collection of European interest groups of vapers, the Italian Medical Observatory on Harm Reduction (MOHRE) and the American organization Tobacco Harm Reduction, Inc. from Florida. The latter organization is led by Lindsey Stroud, who, according to her speaker biography for the Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum 2025, is also a senior fellow of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, as well as a board member of the American Vapor Manufacturers trade association.

EU Reporter is a lobbying vehicle

Despite the long list of names with impressive positions that suggest scientific independence, everything shows the involvement of the nicotine industry. It is not surprising, though, that EU Reporter lends itself to distributing such a lobby document. The medium was unmasked as a lobby vehicle by Politico a few years ago. EU Reporter, which presents itself as a journalistic news medium for European policymakers – ‘independent media for a better debate’ is the subtitle – turns out to be primarily a paid platform for companies to bring their lobbying story to the eyes of European politicians and administrators. So, if the owner of EU Reporter, Colin Stevens, draws extra attention to the open letter in a separate story without any counter-statement, then you know how it is.