WORLD NO TOBACCO DAY 2022 : SMOKING POLLUTES MORE THAN VAPING.

SMOKING POLLUTES MORE THAN VAPING

World No Tobacco Day

TOBACCO : A THREAT TO THE ENVIRONMENT

Every year on May 31st, since 1987, the World Health Organization (WHO) has organised a day to raise awareness of the dangers of smoking and to present its anti-smoking actions throughout the world.

The theme for the 2022 edition is "Tobacco : a threat to our environment".

One might wonder about the WHO's choice of theme so different from its usual considerations of strictly public health, but the WHO has clearly decided to alert public opinion to the correlation between the environmental threat linked to tobacco production and the health threat that this pollution entails.

TOBACCO : POLLUTER AND STARVER

From cultivation to consumption, tobacco is a major polluter. 

In developing countries, tobacco cultivation causes massive deforestation at a rate of 200,000 ha per year. It takes 1300 m2 of land to grow one tonne of tobacco. The destruction of agricultural and food-producing land for the benefit of a non-food, but more profitable, monoculture is a real problem. It has been estimated that the conversion of these crops to agricultural land could feed between 10 and 20 million people and preserve already fragile ecosystems.

Tobacco cultivation requires the use of fertilisers and pesticides in large quantities, polluting the soil and irreparably damaging the food chain. It also consumes a lot of water, with the use of 670 m3 of water to produce one tonne of tobacco, i.e. 8 times more than to grow 1 tonne of potatoes.

In short, each cigarette produced is equivalent to the use of 3.7 litres of water, 3.5g of oil, and its carbon footprint is equivalent to the emission of 14g of CO2 into the atmosphere.

But the main problem is still smoking waste, the cigarette butt.

ENEMY NUMBER 1 : THE CIGARETTE BUTT

The 4,500 billion cigarette butts discarded each year are now the most important waste product on the planet and traces of them are found in 70% of birds and 30% of turtles. 

Furthermore, cigarette butts are still not recycled, which makes the problem of their degradability even more complex. A single cigarette butt takes 12 years to fully degrade and pollutes 500 litres of water.

In the world today, there are still more than one billion smokers, and tobacco is responsible for the death of 8 million people each year.

cigarette butts

WHAT ABOUT E-CIGARETTES ?

The electronic cigarette is not exempt from criticisms on its environmental impact, but unlike traditional cigarettes, the issue of recycling has been raised from the beginning. 

No greenwashing here, vaping is a polluting industry in the same way as those producing other electronic products, but its constant efforts to improve are real.

Its main asset : the electronic cigarette is recyclable and reusable.

How to make your vape more environmentally friendly ? 

Buy large containers of e-liquid or better yet, start DIY, you will not only do something for the planet but also for your wallet.

Vaping is therefore more ecological, provided, of course, that you respect the sorting instructions. At Sweetch, we are committed to taking back your electronic cigarettes at the end of their life, but you can also go to a waste disposal centre and recycle this product like any other electronic device.

As far as health is concerned, let's just remember that tobacco smoke is the result of combustion and releases 7000 chemical substances, at least 70 of which are carcinogenic, whereas e-cigs only produce water vapour. E-liquids ? Propylene glycol and glycerine are commonly used in the pharmaceutical, food, and cosmetic industries, so it is safe to assume that they are not dangerous.

Recycling e-cigarettes

WHO'S POSITION ON VAPING

Contrary to what one might have thought, the covid pandemic has not led to a significant increase in the number of smokers in the world. In fact, it seems that a certain health awareness is emerging, leading millions of smokers to want to end their addiction. But from wanting to quit to actually doing it, there's a huge step, and it's often difficult to take it without help.

The WHO's position on vaping has not changed much over time, and it's very negative. 

Why such hostility to scientific studies proving that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking ? The WHO seems to want to believe that its own tobacco control measures are the only ones that work worldwide. Yet the decline in tobacco consumption since 2012 coincides exactly with the emergence of vaping.

What makes the electronic cigarette so effective in smoking cessation (unlike nicotine patches or gum), is precisely the mimesis produced by the e-cig that effectively deceives the brain in the long term, the very thing that condemns the WHO. In a utopian world where cigarette manufacturers would not try to regain customers who have switched to vaping, the electronic cigarette would only be a transitional tool towards a tobacco-free world.

Today, under the influence of the WHO's antagonistic attitude towards vaping, many national policies have retreated their support for electronic cigarettes as a means of smoking cessation.

A recent example in France : the HCSP (High Council of Public Health) has asked health actors to no longer recommend e-cigarettes in the context of smoking cessation. This shift in decision making has confused many professionals. In 2016, the same HCSP praised vaping.

Fortunately, in reality, many health workers have decided to continue encouraging the switch to electronic cigarettes given the results achieved.

CONCLUSION

The electronic cigarette can undoubtedly claim a more ecological label than traditional cigarettes, even if the situation can still be improved.

Today, there are 82 million vapers in the world, with a 20% increase - 14 million more between 2020 and 2021. A drop in the ocean compared to the number of smokers, but an encouraging increase.

The electronic cigarette remains a tool exclusively for smokers as part of a smoking cessation programme and should not be used solely for recreational purposes.

If only the WHO could review its positions in light of the latest scientific studies, its influence could make a difference.


Thank you for reading. 

The Sweetch team