Unmasking the appeal of tobacco and nicotine products: JA PreventNCD and JA-SAFE in conversation on World No Tobacco Day

World No Tobacco Day is marked every year on 31 May. In 2026, the World Health Organization’s theme is “Unmasking the appeal: countering nicotine and tobacco addiction.” The campaign focuses on how tobacco and nicotine products continue to be reinvented, repackaged and marketed in ways that appeal to new generations, particularly children and adolescents.

Tobacco remains one of the most important preventable causes of disease and premature death in Europe. At the same time, public health efforts are facing a changing landscape, with new nicotine products, cross-border trade, digital marketing, industry influence and regulatory gaps creating new challenges for tobacco and nicotine control.

This remains a major priority for public health in Europe and for the European Commission’s wider prevention agenda. It is also reflected in two EU co-funded Joint Actions: JA PreventNCD, which addresses tobacco as a key cross-cutting theme in the prevention of cancer and other non-communicable diseases, and JA-SAFE, which focuses specifically on health promotion and disease prevention, including smoke- and aerosol-free environments.

To mark World No Tobacco Day, we spoke with Hanna Ollila, Cross-cutting Theme Coordinator for Tobacco in JA PreventNCD; Taija Voutilainen, who leads JA PreventNCD work on alcohol- and tobacco-related perspectives in all policies; and Constantine Vardavas, Professor at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Coordinator of JA-SAFE and Head of the Technical Group of Chemical and Sensory Assessors for Tobacco Product Flavours of the European Commission, about the current state of tobacco and nicotine control in Europe, the challenges ahead, and why international collaboration is essential.

While the two Joint Actions have distinct roles, they are closely connected by a shared prevention agenda. JA-SAFE supports European action on smoke-free and aerosol-free environments, tobacco reduction, cessation, steps towards a tobacco-free generation, and wider health promotion and disease prevention. JA PreventNCD complements this work by addressing tobacco as part of a broader prevention agenda, recognising its role in cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and other non-communicable diseases, while also working to reduce inequalities and strengthen action on the wider conditions that shape people’s health.

To start with, how would you describe the current tobacco and nicotine situation in Europe? Are we still making progress, or is the landscape becoming more complicated?

Europe has made important progress in reducing smoking, but all three experts agree that the overall picture is becoming more complex. Traditional tobacco control remains unfinished, while new nicotine products, digital marketing and uneven regulation are changing the public health landscape.

For Hanna Ollila, the challenge is that Europe is now facing both an ongoing tobacco burden and a fast-changing nicotine market.

“Europe has made progress in reducing tobacco use, but the overall picture is still deeply concerning,” she says. “According to recent WHO/Europe reporting, our Region is still projected to remain the worst-performing globally by 2030 in terms of tobacco use prevalence.”

She points to the European Commission’s recent evaluation of the tobacco control framework as a reminder that current legislation has helped deliver progress, but is no longer fully keeping pace with the market. “Traditional smoking has declined, but newer products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches are creating new public health concerns, especially for young people,” she says.

For Hanna, this means Europe must look beyond traditional tobacco control.

“This is no longer only about unfinished tobacco control. It is also about whether we can modernise regulation quickly enough to respond to a broader and more aggressive nicotine market.”

Taija Voutilainen agrees that the landscape is changing, but highlights the commercial and political strategies behind that change. In her view, the issue is not only the emergence of new products, but also how those products are positioned.

“We’re dealing with a rapidly expanding nicotine market where new products are designed to be appealing, shareable and easily accessible, especially for young people,” she says.

She warns that the industry has not only innovated products, but also repurposed public health language to frame commercial expansion as progress. “The same addiction logic and political playbook remain,” she says. “Interference tactics such as lobbying, harm reduction framing, CSR campaigns and front groups are consistently used, especially around newer nicotine products where regulation is still uneven or unclear.”

For Taija, the key question is whether public health governance can keep pace. “Yes, there is progress, but the battleground is shifting. The question now is whether regulation and governance can keep pace with a broader, more aggressive nicotine market, and whether we protect policymaking from industry influence while doing so.”

From the perspective of JA-SAFE, Constantine Vardavas also sees progress, but stresses that the situation is now more contested and requires stronger implementation support.

“Cigarette smoking remains a major driver of preventable cancer, cardiovascular and respiratory disease, but we are no longer dealing with cigarettes alone,” he says. “Heated tobacco products, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouches and other nicotine-containing products are being promoted across borders, often with strong lifestyle branding and digital marketing that reaches young people faster than regulation can respond.”

This, he argues, has widened the debate from tobacco control to nicotine control and addiction prevention. “For JA-SAFE, this is precisely why we need stronger surveillance, comparable data and practical implementation support.”

He emphasises that monitoring must now go beyond smoking prevalence. “We must monitor not only smoking prevalence, but also dual use, youth experimentation, product design, flavours, online sales, exposure to second-hand smoke and aerosols, and the impact of policy measures.”

“The goal remains clear: a tobacco-free generation in Europe. But to reach it, we must close the gap between the speed of the market and the speed of public health action.”

World No Tobacco Day 2026 focuses on “unmasking the appeal” of nicotine and tobacco products. Why is this theme important now, especially in light of new nicotine products?

For Constantine Vardavas, the theme is timely because the appeal of many new nicotine products is not accidental.

“The appeal of these products is engineered,” he says. “Many new nicotine products are designed to look modern, discreet, colourful and socially acceptable.”

He points to flavours, sleek designs, attractive packaging, high-tech imagery, influencer content and online promotion as part of a broader strategy that can make addictive products appear harmless or aspirational, particularly to adolescents and young adults.

“This is a major prevention challenge,” he says. “Public awareness has not kept pace with marketing practices, and many people still underestimate the extent to which these products are designed to initiate or maintain nicotine dependence.”

For Constantine, the issue is not only the products themselves, but how they are presented and normalised. “Youth appeal is not a side effect of the market; it is a predictable result of aggressive promotion.”

This is also where he sees an important role for JA-SAFE. “JA-SAFE can help by supporting Member States with evidence, shared tools and communication approaches that make the risks visible, especially where aerosols, flavours and digital channels are creating new pathways into addiction.”

Hanna Ollila agrees that the theme is particularly relevant in Europe, where the latest evidence shows how deliberately the appeal of nicotine products is being constructed.

She points to WHO’s recent warning on nicotine pouches as an example. These products, she explains, are being aggressively marketed to adolescents and young people through flavours, sleek and discreet packaging, influencer marketing, sponsorship and youth-oriented lifestyle branding.

“Some packaging even resembles sweets or candy products, which is particularly alarming,” she says.

At the same time, WHO/Europe data show that young people in the Region are already at high risk, with adolescent e-cigarette use at the highest level globally on average and around four million adolescents aged 13 to 15 using tobacco products.

“So when we talk about ‘unmasking the appeal’, we are talking about exposing deliberate commercial strategies that normalise nicotine use, lower perceptions of risk and make addiction look modern, harmless or socially desirable,” Hanna says.

Taija Voutilainen adds that “unmasking the appeal” is also about understanding the wider commercial and political context.

“The appeal is engineered by the industry to recruit new users, especially young people, while exploiting regulatory gaps and cross-border digital environments that outpace enforcement,” she says.

On one level, she explains, the theme is about helping the public recognise how product design, flavours, packaging and digital marketing are used to lower risk perception and normalise nicotine use at a time when youth uptake is rising.

But for Taija, the message also needs to reach governments and European institutions. “Unmasking is not just about calling out marketing tricks,” she says. “It is about naming what is really happening and sending a signal to governments and the European Commission: do not confuse industry-fed ‘economic benefit’ with societal benefit.”

She warns that loose regulation concentrates money and power in commercial actors’ hands, while shifting the health, welfare and long-term economic costs to communities and public systems.

“Governments have a duty to reduce the appeal and availability of these products, close loopholes across borders and online, and protect societies and the future of the young people who will bear the costs of today’s decisions.”

The tobacco and nicotine industry continues to adapt. What tactics should public health actors and policymakers be especially alert to today?

For Taija Voutilainen, policymakers need to recognise that commercial influence shapes both products and policy.

“Policymakers should be alert to how commercial power shapes both products and policy, and understand the obligations of WHO FCTC Article 5.3,” she says.

She points to a familiar set of tactics: lobbying, framing new products as reduced-risk, corporate social responsibility activities that can build legitimacy, and front groups that may appear to be independent or grassroots voices.

“These tactics are especially visible where rules are unclear for newer nicotine products,” she says.

According to Taija, the digital era has made these challenges even more complex. Policy processes can be flooded with industry-linked input, making it harder for public health voices to be heard.

“We have seen EU consultations where large shares of participants were linked to industry, and other consultations filled with thousands of near-identical pro-industry submissions that drowned out health organisations’ statements,” she says.

For her, the conclusion is clear.

“Industry interests are fundamentally in conflict with the public health interest, which is why strong safeguards to prevent industry interference are essential, not optional.”

Constantine Vardavas also highlights the need to look beyond individual products and understand the wider strategy.

“Public health actors should be particularly alert to three tactics,” he says. “First, the industry reframes the debate around innovation while continuing to protect nicotine markets and normalise long-term use. Second, it exploits regulatory gaps, especially for products that fall outside older tobacco legislation, such as nicotine pouches or certain new products. Third, it uses legal pressure, lobbying, third-party voices, corporate social responsibility and economic arguments to delay or weaken policy.”

These tactics are not new, he explains, but they are being adapted to a fast-moving nicotine market.

“In practice, policymakers need strong conflict-of-interest rules, full transparency of meetings and inputs, and consistent application of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, especially Article 5.3 on protecting policy from commercial and vested interests.”

He also stresses that public health actors need to respond carefully. “We should correct misleading claims, expose tactics and present evidence-based alternatives to counter industry narratives.”

For Constantine, the central question should always be whether a policy protects young people, reduces addiction and supports cessation, rather than whether it preserves a commercial market for nicotine.

Hanna Ollila adds that, in Europe, these tactics must be understood alongside the regulatory gaps they exploit.

“Policymakers need to be especially alert to two things at the same time: the industry’s changing tactics and the regulatory gaps those tactics exploit,” she says.

She notes that the European Commission’s evaluation of the tobacco control framework shows that current rules have delivered real public health gains, but were not designed for the scale and speed of today’s new nicotine market.

“That creates openings which companies can use through product design, flavouring, digital advertising, cross-border promotion and narratives of innovation or harm reduction,” Hanna says.

She also points again to nicotine pouches as a clear example of how youth appeal can be built into branding, packaging and promotion.

For Hanna, this is why Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control remains so important. “Public health policy has to be protected from commercial interests, and regulation has to be updated before the market further normalises nicotine addiction among young people.”

Tobacco and nicotine products do not stop at national borders. Why is international collaboration so important in this area?

For Constantine Vardavas, international collaboration is essential because the tobacco and nicotine market is international by design.

“Products are sold online, advertising crosses borders through social media, and differences in taxation or regulation create opportunities for avoidance, illicit trade narratives and market substitution,” he says.

This means that even strong national policies can be weakened if neighbouring countries have different rules on flavours, prices, packaging or online sales.

“A Member State can strengthen its laws, but if neighbouring countries have different rules, the impact will most likely be weakened,” he explains.

For Constantine, this is why European coordination matters. Countries need shared legislation, comparable monitoring, stronger enforcement cooperation and rapid exchange of what works in practice. Taxation, product regulation and marketing restrictions also need to move together, so that the industry cannot simply shift attention to the most permissive channel or product category.

This is one of the areas where he sees a clear role for JA-SAFE. “JA-SAFE provides a platform for this type of practical cooperation,” he says. “It brings together ministries, public health institutes, civil society and research partners to exchange evidence, test implementation approaches, and support more coherent action across countries.”

“Tobacco control has always been stronger when countries learn from each other rather than act in isolation.”

Hanna Ollila also emphasises that Europe’s challenges are shared and interconnected across the Region.

“International collaboration is crucial in Europe because the challenges are both shared and interconnected,” she says.

She points to WHO/Europe’s recent assessment, which shows strong foundations for tobacco control, but also critical implementation gaps and large differences between countries. Online sales, social media promotion, product innovation and uneven regulation create loopholes that are European in scale, not only national.

For Hanna, collaboration is needed to strengthen monitoring, regulation, enforcement and the exchange of good practices. It also helps ensure that strong examples from individual countries do not remain isolated.

“Some countries are already showing that stronger action is possible, including action on flavours, advertising and age limits,” she says. “European cooperation helps turn those examples into broader progress rather than isolated exceptions.”

Taija Voutilainen adds that fragmentation can itself become a commercial advantage.

“Differences in national rules and enforcement create loopholes that are exploited through cross-border trade and online access, undermining stronger national policies,” she says.

From a commercial determinants perspective, this creates an imbalance. Commercial actors can scale products, marketing and influence across countries, while public health actors are often left responding nationally to a regional problem.

“Fragmentation benefits the actors who can scale markets across countries,” she says.

For Taija, this means Europe needs coordinated monitoring, shared enforcement learning and stronger alignment to close gaps before they become the next wave of nicotine addiction.

How are JA PreventNCD and JA-SAFE contributing to stronger European action on tobacco and nicotine-related harm?

For Constantine Vardavas, the two Joint Actions are highly complementary.

“JA PreventNCD addresses tobacco as a major cross-cutting risk factor for non-communicable diseases, while JA-SAFE focuses on concrete implementation areas where Europe now needs acceleration,” he says.

These include smoke-free and aerosol-free environments, cessation, healthcare-based interventions, steps towards a tobacco-free generation, and wider health promotion and disease prevention.

“JA-SAFE is about helping Member States move from evidence to practice,” Constantine explains.

Through its work packages, JA-SAFE supports the implementation of smoke- and aerosol-free environments, strengthens cessation capacity in healthcare settings, maps forward-looking tobacco-control measures, and contributes to the EU goal of reducing tobacco use to below 5% by 2040.

For Constantine, the strongest connection between the two Joint Actions is their shared goal. “Evidence and policy ambition are necessary, but they must be translated into tools, training, communication, local action, enforcement and sustained political support.”

Together, he argues, the two initiatives can help Europe build a more coherent prevention architecture.

Hanna Ollila also sees the two Joint Actions as part of a broader European prevention effort.

“Europe needs not only evidence, but stronger collective capacity to act on that evidence across policy areas,” she says.

She points to the EU Safe Hearts Plan as a strong signal that tobacco and nicotine control should be understood as part of a broader prevention agenda, including cardiovascular health, cancer prevention and reducing inequalities.

“In that context, JA PreventNCD can help ensure that tobacco is not treated as a separate issue, but as a central part of non-communicable disease prevention,” Hanna says.

She explains that JA PreventNCD brings together actions ranging from individual support to wider societal-level measures. This includes work relevant to the modernisation of EU tobacco control legislation, such as the development of a nicotine policy scale and assessments and scenarios on fiscal policies.

JA-SAFE complements this by supporting concrete action on smoke- and aerosol-free environments, cessation, prevention and forward-looking tobacco control measures.

“Together, these initiatives can help Europe move from fragmented responses towards more coordinated and health-promoting action.”

Taija Voutilainen highlights the contribution of JA PreventNCD’s Health in All Policies work, particularly in strengthening governance and protecting policymaking from commercial influence.

“Our work supports governments in moving from awareness to practical protection,” she says.

This includes assessing how industry interference is monitored and identifying where systematic monitoring and dedicated protocols are missing, even in contexts where general transparency measures exist.

Taija also points to implementation questions such as retail regulation and age-limit enforcement. In JA PreventNCD, this includes real-world compliance testing, or mystery shopping, in both physical and online settings.

“Policy impact depends on what happens in practice,” she says.

Her work also highlights how online and cross-border sales can undermine national rules, reinforcing the need for EU-level solutions alongside national enforcement.

Across the wider JA PreventNCD project, she adds, other work addresses individual cessation support and community-level actions. “Overall, JA PreventNCD covers both governance and implementation, protecting policymaking from interference, testing what happens in real retail environments, and strengthening the systems needed to support prevention and cessation.”

What actions are most urgently needed now to reduce tobacco and nicotine-related harm in Europe?

For Hanna Ollila, Europe needs to move beyond gradual adjustment and accelerate action.

“Europe needs accelerated action, not incremental adjustment,” she says.

One urgent priority, she explains, is to modernise the legislative framework so that it better protects children and young people from flavours, digital marketing, cross-border promotion and easy access to nicotine products.

At the same time, Hanna stresses that Europe must strengthen implementation of measures that are already known to work. These include taxation, advertising restrictions, smoke- and aerosol-free regulations, cessation support and protection of policymaking from industry interference.

She also points to the EU Safe Hearts Plan as an important reminder of the long-term commitment ahead.

“The Safe Hearts Plan reminds us of the long-term commitment to achieve a tobacco-free generation, with less than 5% tobacco use by 2040, and that this is a major prevention issue for cardiovascular health and the wider burden of non-communicable diseases in Europe.”

Taija Voutilainen agrees that accelerated action is needed, and emphasises that strong policies require strong safeguards against industry interference.

“To achieve these accelerated actions, the most urgent thing needed is to support the implementation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3,” she says.

This means strengthening the protection of policymaking from industry interference through concrete safeguards, including clear protocols, transparency requirements, conflict-of-interest management and systematic monitoring.

Taija stresses that these requirements should apply not only to the tobacco industry in the traditional sense, but to all actors involved in the production, marketing or sale of tobacco and nicotine products, as well as related organisations.

For her, this is essential if Europe is to close regulatory gaps and ensure that all nicotine products are covered by clear and enforceable rules.

“These rules need to address product appeal, marketing and access, including online and cross-border access that can bypass national controls unless there are harmonised EU-level rules and effective enforcement.”

Constantine Vardavas frames the urgency as a need to close the gap between the scale of the problem and the pace of the policy response.

“At EU level, this means modernising the tobacco and nicotine regulatory framework, including taxation, product regulation, advertising and online sales, so that newer products are not left outside effective control,” he says.

At national level, he points to comprehensive smoke- and aerosol-free environments, enforcement of age restrictions, restrictions on flavours and attractive packaging, investment in cessation, and protection of policymaking from industry interference.

At local level, he says, policy must become practice in schools, healthcare settings, municipalities, sports facilities and other places where children and families live their daily lives.

For Constantine, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control remains the foundation.

“Taxation, advertising bans, plain packaging, health warnings, smoke-free environments, cessation and Article 5.3 are still essential,” he says.

He emphasises that the highest-impact actions for young people are those that reduce affordability, availability and appeal at the same time.

“A single measure will not be enough; Europe needs a comprehensive package of measures and actions.”

How can tobacco and nicotine policies reduce harm while also supporting people who already use these products, especially groups facing greater health risks or inequalities?

For Constantine Vardavas, tobacco and nicotine policies must be both protective and supportive.

“Tobacco use is strongly linked to social and health inequalities,” he says. “People in more disadvantaged circumstances often face higher exposure, higher dependence, more barriers to quitting and greater disease burden.”

Strong regulation can help protect the whole population, but Constantine stresses that it must be accompanied by accessible cessation support for those who already use tobacco or nicotine products.

“Services need to be prepared not only for cigarette smoking, but also for dual use and dependence on newer nicotine products,” he says.

This includes training health professionals, integrating brief interventions into routine care, ensuring referral pathways, and making evidence-based cessation support affordable and acceptable.

Constantine also emphasises the importance of avoiding stigma.

“The responsibility for addiction should not be placed on individuals when commercial actors design, market and profit from addictive products,” he says.

For him, prevention and cessation must work together. Prevention reduces the number of new users, while cessation reduces harm among current users. Equity means ensuring that the strongest protection and the best support reach those who need them most.

Hanna Ollila also stresses that tobacco and nicotine policy must be approached through both equity and effectiveness.

“Tobacco-related harm is not distributed evenly, and the same is true for access to prevention and cessation support,” she says.

Policies therefore need to prevent new uptake while also supporting people who are already dependent on tobacco or nicotine products.

For Hanna, a strong European response should combine population-level protection with practical support. This is essential to ensure that preventing and reducing tobacco and nicotine use does not become something only the most advantaged groups can achieve.

Taija Voutilainen agrees that policies must both prevent new uptake and support people who are already dependent on nicotine, but adds that they must do so in a way that reduces inequalities rather than deepening them.

“Population-level prevention, enforcement and accessible cessation support need to be developed together, with special attention to groups facing higher exposure and lower access to support,” she says.

For Taija, it is important to keep the focus on the wider systems that shape nicotine use.

“The problem is not the people using these products; it is the industry that profits from addiction and actively shapes environments, messages and policies to expand its market,” she says.

By framing nicotine use mainly as an individual choice, she argues, the industry shifts attention away from structural drivers and unequal harms.

That is why monitoring and strong governance matter. “They shift the focus back to where it belongs: on system-level problems, product design, marketing environments, availability and the policy process itself.”

Finally, if you could give one message to policymakers on World No Tobacco Day, what would it be?

For Hanna Ollila, the message is that Europe should treat this as a decisive moment.

“Europe should treat the current moment as a window for action,” she says.

“The question is not whether the evidence is strong enough. The question is whether Europe is ready to act quickly enough to protect children and adolescents, reduce inequalities and prevent the next wave of nicotine addiction.”

Constantine Vardavas also emphasises urgency, arguing that public health policy must move faster than the market.

“My message to policymakers is simple: act faster and more determined than the industry,” he says.

The tobacco and nicotine market is evolving rapidly, and every delay creates space for new products, new users and new forms of dependence.

For Constantine, public health policy should not be shaped by commercial pressure or by narratives that present addiction as innovation. Success over the next decade would mean comprehensive regulation of all tobacco and nicotine products, strong taxation, effective restrictions on flavours and marketing, smoke- and aerosol-free environments, and accessible cessation support, all leading to a measurable decline in youth use.

“It would also mean that the tobacco-free generation goal is not only a slogan, but a practical policy pathway,” he says.

What gives him hope is the growing alignment between European institutions, WHO, Member States, professional societies, researchers and civil society organisations.

“The evidence is strong, the public health community is mobilised, and JA-SAFE can help turn that momentum into credible action.”

Taija Voutilainen adds that policymakers should not view tobacco and nicotine control simply as a debate about individual choice.

“This is a matter of leadership: protecting constituents from corporate exploitation, commercial incentives and power,” she says.

The tobacco and nicotine industry, she argues, engineers appeal, access and influence, while society, especially young people, pays the price in health, welfare and lost opportunities.

For Taija, policymakers have both the mandate and the responsibility to act decisively by closing regulatory loopholes, reducing product appeal and marketing, and safeguarding the next generation from being recruited into lifelong dependence.

She also stresses that effective policy requires protection from industry interference.

“Protecting policymaking from industry interference must be treated as non-negotiable,” she says.

In practice, that means implementing WHO FCTC Article 5.3 with concrete safeguards: clear rules for interaction, transparency, conflict-of-interest management and systematic monitoring, applied consistently to all actors involved in producing, marketing or selling tobacco or nicotine products and their related organisations.

Thank you to Hanna Ollila, Taija Voutilainen and Constantine Vardavas for sharing their reflections on tobacco and nicotine control in Europe.

World No Tobacco Day 2026 is a timely reminder that progress in tobacco control cannot be taken for granted. While many countries have made important gains in reducing smoking, the rapid growth of new nicotine products, cross-border trade, digital marketing and continued industry influence create new challenges for prevention.

It is also a reminder that these challenges cannot be addressed in isolation. Through JA PreventNCD and JA-SAFE, partners across Europe are working to strengthen collaboration, support evidence-informed policy and contribute to the shared goal of reducing tobacco- and nicotine-related harm.

Protecting young people, closing regulatory gaps, supporting people who want to quit and safeguarding public health policy from commercial influence will be essential steps towards a healthier, fairer and tobacco-free future.