Experts call for science-based approach in tobacco law review

Health experts are urging the National Assembly to ensure Kenya’s proposed tobacco law reflects scientific evidence by distinguishing between combustible cigarettes and smoke-free nicotine alternatives.

The debate centres on the proposed Tobacco Control Amendment Bill, which seeks to tighten regulations on the sale, marketing, labelling and access of tobacco and nicotine products in Kenya.

While supporting the proposed reforms, experts argue that the legislation should avoid a blanket approach that treats all tobacco and nicotine products the same despite major differences in health risk.

Speaking in Nairobi during a regional scientific forum on tobacco harm reduction and public health policy, medical oncologist and cancer specialist Dr. Peter Harper said most smoking-related illnesses are caused by the burning of tobacco and inhalation of smoke.

He noted that combustible cigarettes remain the leading cause of lung cancer, heart disease and chronic respiratory illnesses due to the toxic chemicals produced during combustion.

In his submission to Parliament, Dr. Harper argued that the law should clearly separate cigarettes from non-combustible alternatives instead of regulating them as though they carry the same level of harm.

Health policy expert Dr. Vivian Munyeki said the amendment bill is intended to address gaps that existed in the original tobacco control law, particularly around youth access restrictions and emerging nicotine products.

She said stakeholders are advocating for the inclusion of tobacco harm reduction measures and a regulatory framework that recognises differences between products.

“We want to encourage lawmakers not to take a one-size-fits-all approach. Electronic vaping systems, nicotine products and non-nicotine products should each be regulated based on their specific characteristics and risks,” said Dr. Munyeki.

She noted that one of the major challenges facing tobacco harm reduction efforts is public distrust of cigarette manufacturers, many of whom are also promoting newer smoke-free alternatives.

According to Dr. Munyeki, there are also concerns that discussions around harm reduction could be misconstrued as attempts to normalise smoking or make such products accessible to young people.

“Some people perceive tobacco harm reduction as an effort to make smoking acceptable among the youth, which is not true,” she added.

Experts at the forum also cautioned lawmakers against ignoring the behavioural realities faced by smokers, noting that many adult smokers struggle to quit nicotine entirely.

Harm reduction advocates say public health policy should provide practical pathways away from cigarettes rather than relying solely on abstinence-based approaches.

They pointed to Kenya’s previous adoption of harm reduction measures such as needle exchange programmes and opioid substitution therapy, arguing that tobacco policy should similarly be guided by evidence and public health outcomes.

The Nairobi meeting brought together health experts from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda and other regional markets to discuss tobacco harm reduction and evolving public health policies in Africa.