The Dutch government has completely lost the plot when it comes to tobacco harm reduction. Recent decisions by the ministerial council have revealed a regulatory framework that prioritises outdated anti-vaping rhetoric while inexplicably protecting cigarettes, the most harmful nicotine product on the market. This approach is not only nonsensical but actively harmful to public health.

Mandating Vape Sales in Specialist Shops Before Cigarettes

One of the most absurd measures is the decision to mandate that vapes can only be sold in specialist shops starting in 2026—six years ahead of similar restrictions for cigarettes, which will only be confined to specialist shops by 2032. This timeline defies logic. Vaping is widely recognised as significantly less harmful than smoking, with studies showing it poses a fraction of the risks associated with combustible tobacco. Yet, the government is effectively making vapes harder to access long before implementing similar restrictions for cigarettes, which remain responsible for countless deaths annually. 

This move not only undermines harm reduction efforts but sends a dangerous message: that cigarettes are somehow more acceptable than vaping. It’s a slap in the face to smokers trying to quit and vapers who have already made the switch to a less harmful alternative.

Banning Vape Flavours That Help Smokers Quit

The Netherlands has already implemented one of Europe’s strictest flavour bans, allowing only tobacco-flavoured e-liquids. The government claims this is necessary to prevent youth uptake, but this argument is deeply flawed. Flavours like fruits and desserts are crucial in helping adult smokers transition away from cigarettes because they make vaping more appealing and distinct from smoking. By banning these flavours, the government is driving smokers back to cigarettes or forcing them into illegal markets—a move that benefits no one. 

The flavour ban has already led to significant declines in vaping rates, with one in five Dutch vapers quitting entirely since its implementation. While this might sound like progress to some, many former vapers are likely returning to smoking—a far more harmful habit. The ban also ignores evidence showing that flavour bans do little to deter youth vaping but instead harm adult smokers seeking safer alternatives.

Outright Ban on Nicotine Pouches

Adding insult to injury, the Dutch government banned nicotine pouches. These products are among the least harmful nicotine alternatives available and have been instrumental in helping smokers quit without inhaling harmful chemicals. Banning them outright removes yet another tool from the harm reduction arsenal and pushes consumers back toward deadly cigarettes.

A Backward Approach to Public Health

The Dutch government’s relentless crackdown on vaping and other reduced-risk products flies in the face of harm reduction principles. Instead of embracing these innovations as tools to achieve their smoke-free generation goals by 2040, they are sabotaging their own efforts with misguided policies. 

Here’s what these regulations achieve:

• Protecting cigarettes: By making safer alternatives less accessible and less appealing, smokers are left with fewer options but to continue using combustible tobacco.
• Punishing adult consumers: Adults who rely on vaping or nicotine pouches as safer alternatives are being penalised for making less harmful choices.
• Fueling black markets: Restrictive bans and flavour prohibitions drive consumers toward illegal channels, where products are unregulated and potentially dangerous.

A Call for Common Sense

The Dutch government’s approach is an embarrassment to public health policy. It prioritises fear-mongering over science, ideology over evidence, and prohibition over harm reduction. If the goal is truly a smoke-free generation by 2040, then policies must focus on reducing harm—not eliminating safer alternatives while leaving deadly cigarettes untouched.

It’s time for policymakers in the Netherlands to wake up and realise that their current trajectory will lead not to fewer smokers but more preventable deaths. Harm reduction works, but only if governments stop sabotaging it.