Manila, Philippines – 26 November 2025
CAPHRA is
raising strong concerns about the increasingly rigid and
punitive tone emerging from recent coverage of global
tobacco control discussions. The latest article from Health
Policy Watch on the recently held FCTC COP11 frames any
government or expert who questions full prohibition as being
influenced by industry interests. CAPHRA believes this
framing is inaccurate, unfair, and risks undermining genuine
progress in reducing smoking related harm across the
region.
CAPHRA Executive Coordinator Nancy Loucas said
the debate has shifted away from science and respectful
engagement. “The suggestion that any country or advocate
who supports harm reduction must be aligned with industry is
unacceptable. It is an authoritarian approach that shuts
down legitimate scientific discussion. Public health
decisions should be based on evidence, not ideological
purity tests,” she said.
CAPHRA Philippine
representative Clarisse Virgino emphasised that harm
reduction is a recognised pillar of public health. “Many
countries want balanced policies that protect youth and
support adults who smoke to move away from deadly
combustible cigarettes. These positions are grounded in
science and public health realities in their own
communities. They should not be dismissed or vilified simply
because they do not mirror prohibition,” she
said.
Both Loucas and Virgino noted that the article
itself refers to complaints about ideological rigidity
within the treaty process. CAPHRA believes those complaints
reflect a wider concern from governments that the current
approach does not allow room for innovation, updated
evidence, or diverse national contexts. Loucas added, “Not
all products carry the same risk, and not all countries face
the same challenges. Treating every viewpoint that is not
prohibition as suspicious makes it impossible to design
effective, proportionate policies.”
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
The coalition
also expressed concern that consensus based decision making
has led to repeated delays rather than meaningful
agreements. Virgino said, “This paralysis cannot be blamed
solely on industry influence, as the article implies. It
reflects a refusal to consider harm reduction approaches
even when they come from credible delegations. Governments
deserve better than a process that silences dissent instead
of examining it.”
CAPHRA urges global tobacco
control leaders to adopt a more open and science focused
process. The organisation calls for transparent debate,
respect for national differences, and recognition that harm
reduction plays a vital role in reducing deaths caused by
smoking.
“A world that truly wants to reduce disease
and save lives cannot afford to embrace absolutism,”
Loucas said. “Accusations and ideological pressure will
not deliver public health gains. Evidence, honesty, and
genuine engagement
will.”
