Image source: Luis Barrios/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Key Points

• Mexico is a country in North America, covered by the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for the Americas.
• It has a population of over 127.5 million with current smoking prevalence of 19% amongst the population aged 20 and over.
• Mexico ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2004. It has not joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• The Mexican tobacco market is dominated by the big transnational tobacco companies, particularly Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in Mexico include the use of third parties; the targeting of youth with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products, particularly on social media; and corporate social responsibility, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mexico significantly reduced smoking prevalence between 2002-2009, in the years around ratification of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC).¹²³ However, between 2009 and 2016 there was no further progress. This may be explained by ongoing industry interference, such as on price and tax; the introduction and rapid growth of flavour capsule cigarettes; as well as challenges involved with implementation of Mexico’s main tobacco control law.³⁴ In more recent years, Mexico has redoubled its efforts, passing a major amendment to its tobacco control law in 2021 which significantly increased compliance with the WHO FCTC.⁵ Mexico now has some of the most comprehensive tobacco control regulation in the world.⁵⁶

Tobacco Use in Mexico

In 2022, the population of Mexico was over 127.5 million.⁷ According to the 2021 National Health and Nutrition Survey on COVID-19 (ENSANUT), prevalence of current smoking in the Mexican population aged 20 and over was just over 19%. There is significant difference between males and females, with nearly 30% of men reporting current smoking compared to around 9% of women. Prevalence of current smoking amongst Mexican youth aged from 10 to 19 was less than 5%, with 7.5% of males in this age range smoking compared to less than 2% of females.⁸

There were an estimated 48,400 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for 6.6% of all mortality in Mexico that year.⁹ A study published in 2021 estimated the total cost of tobacco use to the Mexican economy at US$8.2 billion per year. US$5.1 billion is spent on treating diseases associated with tobacco use – equivalent to 9.3% of the annual health budget. The US$1.9 billion that Mexico receives in revenue from the tobacco industry covers just 38% of the burden of tobacco use.¹⁰

Since 2008, Mexico has prohibited sale, distribution and promotion of any product that resembles a cigarette, which has been applied to e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (see section “Roadmap to Tobacco Control”).¹¹¹² Even so, in the 2021 ENSANUT survey, current use of e-cigarette by adults aged 20 and over was 1.6% (2.5% for males; 0.7% for females). Amongst youth aged 10 to 19, prevalence was slightly higher, at 1.8% (2.4% for males; 1.1% for females).⁸ A 2022 survey by the National Commission Against Addictions estimated that five million Mexicans between the ages of 12 and 65 had used e-cigarettes at some point, with 975,000 being current users.¹³

Tobacco in Mexico

Market share and leading brands

In 2022, market research company Euromonitor International estimated the Mexican tobacco market to be worth nearly 89 billion Mexican pesos (US$4.5 billion), mostly accounted for by cigarette sales.¹⁴ The market is dominated by the big transnational tobacco companies (TTCs), particularly Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT), and to a much lesser extent Japan Tobacco International (JTI). Between them, these three companies accounted for virtually all legal cigarette sales in 2022. PMI is the market leader with just over 60%, followed by BAT with just under 36%. JTI’s share was 4%.¹⁵

As of 2022, the top six brands in Mexico were all manufactured by either PMI or BAT. By far the most popular cigarette was PMI’s premium brand Marlboro, with a market share of over 48%. This was followed by BAT’s mid-range cigarette Pall Mall, with under 22%. All other brands had a share of less than 10%.¹⁶

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Mexico, see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

The use of flavour capsule cigarettes is particularly high in several Latin American countries, including Mexico, where their share of the market has risen year on year since 2012.¹⁷ Although they were only introduced in 2011, flavour capsule cigarettes accounted for nearly 28% of the cigarette market in 2022 – amongst the highest proportions in the world.³¹⁸ Research has shown that flavour capsules increase the appeal of cigarettes and stimulate a desire to try them, particularly amongst young people.¹⁸¹⁹

• For more information, see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs.

Tobacco farming and child labour

Tobacco growing in Mexico has fallen considerably since 1980, when it produced nearly 94,000 tonnes of leaf, to under 7,000 tonnes in 2010 (see Figure 1). However, in 2010 production started to increase again, rising to over 15,000 tonnes by 2012, since when the figure has remained roughly stable.²⁰

Figure 1: Mexican tobacco production, 1961 to 2020.²¹ Source: UN Food and Agriculture Organization/Our World in Data | CC BY

Similarly, in 1980 the harvested area was 42,000 hectares, falling to 4,000 hectares in 2010, but up to 7,000 in 2020.²⁰

A series of exposés in the 1990s revealed widespread use of child labour on Mexico tobacco farms, as well as the use of banned agrochemicals and poor living and working conditions for tobacco pickers. While the industry claims much has changed since then, an investigation by The Guardian in 2018 found children working on seven out of the ten farms the report visited in the state of Nayarit, Mexico’s main tobacco growing region. The farms featured in the investigation were supplying PMI, BAT and Universal Leaf Tobacco.²²

• For information on tobacco industry responses to accusations of complicity in child labour, please see the pages on CSR: Child Labour and the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT).

Tobacco and the economy

Mexico is a net exporter both of tobacco leaf and cigarettes. According to UN Comtrade, it exported approximately US$7.1 million in raw tobacco in 2022, compared to around US$2.4 million in imports.²³²⁴

A 2021 report on the impacts of tobacco tax, published by the Center of Research on Food and Development (CIAD), which bases its calculations on the Secretariat of Economy’s Online Tariff Information System, puts the figure for cigarette exports in 2019 at close to US$180 million, compared to imports of over $10 million.²⁵ This corresponds to customs data from Descartes Datamyne, which put cigarette exports for 2020 at over $168 million, compared to imports of US$10.7 million.²⁶ However, the Comtrade figure for cigarette exports in 2020 is much lower.²⁷ No import data is available on Comtrade for that year.

According to the CIAD report, seventy per cent of Mexican cigarette exports served the Canadian market, 15% the Colombian market, and 11% Central American markets.²⁵ Customs data also indicates these are the main export destinations for cigarettes manufactured in Mexico.²⁶

The CIAD report also states that the tobacco industry is a relatively small sector of the Mexican economy, employing just 0.1% of the national workforce in 2018.²⁵

Illicit trade

In a 2021 study which measured the Mexican illicit tobacco trade using two methodologies, illicit cigarettes accounted for 8.8% of total consumption based on an analysis of discarded packs, and 7.6% based on a survey of smokers. Both results are significantly lower than the figure of 16.6% which is widely publicised by the tobacco industry.²⁸ While the figures obtained via both methodologies represent an increase from previous estimates of illicit cigarette consumption – 0.5% in 2009 and 2.7% in 2015 – they are lower than the global average and lower than the figure for other countries in Latin America such as Brazil, Chile and Uruguay.²⁹³⁰ A previous study also found wide geographical variation across the country: for example, in Hermosillo, Sonora, just 0.3% of total cigarette consumption was illicit, while in León, Guanajato, the figure was as high as 27.5%.²⁹

There is also an illegal e-cigarette market. Between January 2021 and June 2022, Mexican authorities seized over 60,000 devices, suspending the activities of nearly 180 retail outlets.³¹

Tobacco and the environment

Mexico produces around 40 billion cigarettes annually. This consumes between 109 and 205 billion litres of water and between 73 and 114 million kilowatts of energy. It also generates CO₂ emissions of between 20,000 and 29,000 tonnes. Around 55 million cigarette butts are discarded every day in Mexico, at an estimated cost of close to US$140 million annually.³²

• For more information, please see the page on Tobacco and the Environment and the long read on Plastics, the Environment and the Tobacco Industry.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Mexico was the first country in the Americas to ratify the WHO FCTC in 2004.² However, it has not joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.³³

In 2008, The General Law on Tobacco Control came into force, containing most of the provisions established in the WHO FCTC.³⁴ However, it left some significant loopholes. While smoking was completely prohibited indoors in primary and secondary schools, and in federal government facilities, workplaces and other buildings with public access were permitted to provide designated smoking areas. Similarly, the law banned most forms of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, but made an exception in cases where it was aimed exclusively at adults.³⁵ Some stricter regulation was introduced at subnational level. For example, Mexico City passed its own 100% smokefree law in February 2008 and in the following years 14 states followed suit.³⁶³⁷

In 2021, the Mexican Senate unanimously approved a key amendment to the 2008 General Law, which banned smoking in all enclosed public spaces and workplaces, as well as banning all forms of tobacco advertising.⁵ A further update, which came into force in January 2023, extended smoke-free legislation even to open-air environments where there may be public gatherings, such as parks, beaches and restaurant terraces. It also bans the display of tobacco products in all retail outlets.⁶³⁸³⁹ With these two measures, Mexico made important progress towards full compliance with the WHO FCTC.⁵

Mexico has taken a tough stance on newer nicotine and tobacco products. Since 2008, there has been a ban on any product that resembles a cigarette.⁴⁰⁴¹⁴² Regulators have applied this law to e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs), but it has been contested by both retailers and tobacco companies.¹¹⁴⁰ In 2020, the government banned imports of e-cigarettes and HTPs, bringing customs law into line with existing health regulations.⁴³ Though a decree published by the Secretariat of Economy in July 2021 created an exception for HTPs, this was reversed by a new presidential decree in October of the same year.⁴⁴⁴⁵

Finally, on World No Tobacco Day in May 2022, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador signed a decree imposing a total ban on “circulation and marketing” of e-cigarettes and HTPs. This effectively makes the import and sale of these products illegal in Mexico.⁴⁰⁴⁶

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country – Mexico, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Mexico, WHO FCTC implementation database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country Profile – Mexico, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2023

Tobacco Industry Interference in Mexico

Tobacco industry tactics in Mexico include the use of third parties; the targeting of youth with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products, particularly on social media; and corporate social responsibility, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Use of third parties

Tobacco companies often lobby via industry and trade associations, think tanks, front groups and other third parties, including public relations (PR) companies and professional lobbyists.

In Mexico, the Confederación Patronal de la República Mexicana (COPARMEX) is an employers’ union, which brings together businesses of all sizes and from all sectors.⁴⁷ In 2021, Philip Morris International (PMI) listed COPARMEX as one of the business and trade organisations in which it held a leadership role.⁴⁸

In May 2022, Mexico held a public consultation on an update to its revised tobacco control law, regarding proposals to completely ban the display of tobacco products at points of sale, and to further restrict designated smoking areas to limited open-air environments.³⁸ COPARMEX’s submission to the consultation argued that cost of implementing these measures would be high and adversely impact the owners of small businesses; that the proposals violated the right to free trade; and that they would fuel the growth of the illicit trade.⁴⁹

The National Tobacco Industry Council (CONAINTA) – of which PMI, BAT and JTI are all members – also opposed these measures, arguing that they would have a negative impact on the national economy, including on tobacco growing communities; that they violated consumer rights; and that they would endanger jobs and investment.⁵⁰ In 2023, the president of CONAINTA warned that there would be a “storm” of legal appeals against the updated tobacco control law.⁵¹

Controversial marketing: targeting youth

The tobacco industry has long seen young people as a vital target market; tobacco use generally starts in adolescence. According to the 2016-7 National Survey of Drugs, Alcohol and Tobacco Consumption, the average age of initiation for daily tobacco consumption in Mexico was less than 20 years old.⁵²

Mexican media have documented tobacco companies targeting young people with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products via social media. From around 2018, industry hashtags – such as #FuturoSinHumo (“#SmokeFreeFuture”) and #EligeElCambio (“#ChooseChange” – both PMI) and #vypefriends and #govype (both BAT) began to appear on posts by popular Mexican actors, influencers, comedians and others.⁵³⁵⁴ Products such as PMI’s HTP IQOS and BAT’s e-cigarette Vype (since rebranded as Vuse) featured visibly in this content, though often company sponsorship was not made explicit.⁵³

Even before the General Law on Tobacco Control was amended in late 2021, it prohibited tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship in all but three circumstances: in adult magazines, in adult-only establishments, or in personal correspondence to adults via post. It also specifically prohibited the online marketing of tobacco products.³⁵ According to a lawyer at the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, “these products must comply with the General Law on Tobacco Control, which clearly establishes a near-total ban on this publicity.”⁵³

A 2022 study on exposure to e-cigarette advertising and the social acceptability of e-cigarette use in Mexico identified online advertising as one of the channels of exposure most significantly associated with a higher likelihood of perceiving e-cigarettes as socially acceptable.⁵⁵ According to a researcher at the National Institute of Public Health – one of the authors of the study – the industry’s aim is the “renormalization” of nicotine consumption amongst young people.⁵³

• See also the page on PMI’s Futuro Sin Humo campaign.

The tobacco industry has also sponsored motorsports in Mexico. In the 2022 Mexico City Grand Prix, held in October, the McLaren cars displayed BAT’s Vuse branding – in an apparent violation of the comprehensive ban on e-cigarettes brought in just months beforehand.⁵⁶ Motorsport sponsorship is a longstanding and well-documented promotional strategy aimed at young people, particularly boys and young men.⁵⁷

Corporate social responsibility

Tobacco companies often use corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives to enhance their public image and corporate reputation.

In 2018, PMI’s local subsidiary Philip Morris México (PMM) set up a partnership with a local start-up, Eco Filter, which uses biotechnology to recycle cigarette butts.⁵³⁵⁸ This partnership involves clean-up and collection initiatives which target young people, with events taking place at concerts, parks and universities. Eco Filter also delivers presentations to young people in which it displays PMI logos, and has used the social media hashtag and PMI slogan #FuturoSinHumo.⁵³⁵⁹ Eco Filter states that it does not promote PMI’s products or encourage nicotine consumption amongst young people.⁵³

In 2021, Eco Filter opened a new factory in Guadalajara, Jalisco, with support from PMM.⁵⁸⁶⁰ It will process waste from PMM’s manufacturing facility near Guadalajara, as well as cigarette butts from the street.⁶¹⁶²

• See also Cigarette Filters.

Both PMI and BAT carried out extensive corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic. In May 2020, PMI donated electric beds, vital signs monitors and ventilators to a hospital in Guadalajara. PMI also donated money for personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare professionals, and meals to a public welfare institution.⁶³ BAT joined a programme called UNIR y DAR (“UNITE and GIVE”) with other local companies in Nuevo León, where BAT México is headquartered. As part of an initiative called #RespiraNL, these companies made donations for PPE.⁶⁴ BAT also provided food supplies in Guadalupe, Nuevo León.⁶⁵

There are also CSR initiatives on child labour in Mexico. For example, since 2001 BAT has run a programme called “Florece” (meaning “Blossom” or “Flourish” in English), which provides day centres for the children of workers in the tobacco fields of Nayarit.⁶⁶⁶⁷

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Relevant Links

• III Índice Regional de Interferencia de la Industria Tabacalera en países de América Latina y el Caribe 2023, Corporate Accountability, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Mexico – Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2021, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Interferencia de tabacaleras en México: reporte de índice regional, Salud Justa, 2021
• Mexico: the long road to Tobacco Control, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
• Mexico – Cigarette Tax Scorecard, Tobacconomics
• Tobacco Industry Interference in Mexico, STOP
• México, Organización Panamericana de la Salud

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• E-cigarettes: British American Tobacco
• Futuro Sin Humo
• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs
• PMI’s IQOS: Use, “Switching” and “Quitting”

TCRG Research

• Developing more detailed taxonomies of tobacco industry political activity in low-income and middle-income countries: qualitative evidence from eight countries, B.K. Matthes, K. Lauber, M. Zatoński, L. Robertson, A.B. Gilmore, BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e004096.

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to TCRG publications.

References

The post Mexico Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• Menthol and flavoured cigarettes are widely available in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) many of which have high smoking rates
• LMICs have young populations – flavours appeal to young people, who may not understand the harms of flavoured tobacco
• Recently high-income countries have put bans in place; at the same time there has been marked growth of menthol market share in some LMICs
• There is a lack of regulation to reduce the appeal of flavours e.g. plain packs and advertising bans at point-of-sale or near schools
• Targets for new and improved bans include flavour capsules, and flavour references on packaging and cigarette sticks
• A ban on all flavourings may be easier and more effective in preventing product substitution
• A lack of data, especially in low-income countries, hinders the development of good regulation
• Multinational tobacco companies can threaten income from tobacco exports if governments attempt to put tobacco controls in place

This page covers flavoured tobacco, including menthol cigarettes, in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).⁶⁸⁶⁹

Background

Flavoured tobacco products are available in various forms around the world, including products previously only used in particular regions or countries. For example in Indonesia, the vast majority of smokers use kretek, clove-flavoured cigarettes,⁷⁰⁷¹ and they are now available in other countries.⁷²⁷³

Flavoured tobacco is used in waterpipe, a device which originated in middle-eastern countries and is increasingly popular elsewhere, including among young people.⁷⁴

Here we focus on what are often called ‘conventional’ products, like cigarettes and cigarillos, which are sold by large transnational tobacco companies (TTCs): Philip Morris International (PMI), British American Tobacco (BAT), Imperial Brands (IMB, previously Imperial Tobacco) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) (JTI also owns Nakhla in Egypt, which produces flavoured waterpipe) We summarise findings from Tobacco Control Research Group (TCRG) research on the extent of flavoured and menthol cigarette use in LMICs and the development of the market for ‘capsule’ products (cigarettes with flavour capsules in the filter).

We describe specific challenges for LMICs, including flavour regulation and evidence gathering. We then summarise flavour market evidence and research, first relating to LMICs in general and then by World Health Organization (WHO) region and individual countries (where available).

• For general background and evidence, including information on the global market, and details of specific bans and associated industry interference, see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco.

For details of product regulation at country level, see the searchable database on the Tobacco Control Laws website, published by the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK). For countries that are parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) progress towards implementation of relevant articles, including newer products, is detailed in the FCTC implementation database

Specific challenges for LMICs

LMICs with no ban often have other major tobacco control policy gaps that are not necessarily menthol/flavour related but worsen the negative impact of menthol/flavours.⁷⁵ One such policy is plain, or standardised, packaging,  which can include restrictions on flavour descriptors as well as colours on packaging which are known to signify flavour (e.g. green for menthol).⁷⁶ However, plain packaging policies have yet to be implemented in many countries, including some high-income countries, so this would be a significant challenge in LMICs. Another relevant policy is the prohibition of marketing, especially near schools.⁶

Governments have more conflicts of interest in tobacco growing areas as they receive much needed foreign currency for tobacco exports,  and multinational companies can threaten this income stream if governments attempt to put tobacco controls in place.⁷⁵⁷⁷  However, apart from rare exceptions the tobacco industry contributes little overall to the balance of payments.⁷⁸⁷⁹

Regulatory challenges

The WHO published brief guidance on the regulation of menthol and flavoured tobacco which summarised some regulatory options including restrictions on: the sale of menthol branded products,  the use of menthol at noticeable levels (giving a ‘characterising flavour’),  or banning any menthol ingredients.⁸⁰  The report points to likely opposition from the tobacco industry in countries or regions with an established menthol market.⁸⁰ This was the case with the European Union (EU) menthol ban which only came into full force in 2020, after the tobacco industry had successfully lobbied for a delay. Testing for characterising flavour is more difficult and expensive than a ban on ingredients; this makes banning menthol as an ingredient particularly efficient for LMICs.

The WHO noted that:

“A ban on all flavour agents that increase tobacco product attractiveness, rather than focusing on menthol exclusively, can provide an alternate route to restricting menthol, and may prevent the unwanted introduction of menthol substitutes.”⁸⁰

Research and data

As of 2021, when TCRG researchers conducted a review of evidence on menthol/flavour in LMICs,⁸¹ there were very few research papers from countries in Eastern Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean region, and Africa.

Lack of data means that it is hard to monitor markets and company shares in specific countries.  Market research service Euromonitor (which receives project funding from Philip Morris International) includes no low-income countries and is proprietary, making it expensive and hard to access even for the middle-income countries which are included.

More research is needed on menthol and flavour in LMICs to help governments monitor the tobacco industry and its products, as recommended by the WHO: “An evidence base using data collected from the region of interest can provide more direct support for regulation.”⁸⁰

Market in LMICs

Evidence suggests menthol and flavoured tobacco products are widely used in LMICs.  Data from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Policy Evaluation Project suggests that menthol is smoked by more than 20% of smokers in several middle-income countries. Although the dates vary (see the note above on data challenges) this research gives an indication of the scale of the problem. The highest rates were found in Zambia (42% in 2014) and Thailand (35% in 2012). Kenya and India also had over 20% menthol smokers, with China just under just under that level.⁸²

A study from Johns Hopkins University, between 2015 and 2017, found a range of flavoured and capsule cigarettes on the market in those LMICs with the highest number of smokers: Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Philippines, Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam.⁸³

The main TTCs operating in these countries (PMI, JTI, and BAT) mostly sold menthol or mint flavours. China National Tobacco Corporation (CNTC) sold  a mix of flavours.⁸³

There is also evidence from a number of studies that menthol and flavour tobacco use is rising, either as a proportion of the market or substantively.  Evidence from TCRG research shows that after the implementation of the European Union (EU) menthol ban in 2020, there was a marked increase in the share of menthol/flavoured products in some LMICs.⁸¹ A study of cigarette packs in Brazil, Indonesia, the Philippines, Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam, between 2013 and 2016, found that the number of flavour capsule variants on the market was growing.⁸⁴ Most were mint and menthol flavour but with others the flavour was unclear from the product name.⁸⁴

A number of studies have identified related marketing activities.  Marketing strategies for flavour capsules are likely driving their global growth particularly among young people in LMICs.⁸⁵

TCRG’s review  of tobacco industry strategies underpinning the growth of menthol/flavoured tobacco use in LMICs  highlighted widespread marketing in stores (including retailers near schools), on billboards, on TV, online and via brand ambassadors. The packaging of flavoured and menthol products, legally displayed in stores, was  found to be colourful with non-conventional, appealing names for flavours.⁸¹

Tobacco companies also use symbols on cigarette sticks to indicate that they contain capsules.⁸⁶ Researchers studying this form of marketing in LMICs have described the space on a cigarette as “valuable communicative real estate” for tobacco companies, which could be better used to display public health messages.⁸⁶

Research and data from specific regions and countries is summarised below. We refer in many places to TCRG research based on 2019 cigarette market data from Euromonitor. In this data ‘high market share’ means 20% or more of the total cigarette market in that country in 2019. ‘High market share growth’ means that the share doubled between 2005-19 and was growing from 2017.⁸¹ We link to regional and country profile pages on TobaccoTactics, where available.

Africa

Nigeria has high menthol/flavour market share and high market share growth.⁸¹

Cameroon has high market share, the only other country in the region for which this data was available. (For Egypt see Eastern Mediterranean region below.)⁸¹

Tanzania

JTI sells a menthol cigarette called Sweet Menthol through its subsidiary in Tanzania. It describes this product as “the leading local mainstream menthol brand”.⁸⁷

Zambia

JTI owned brand Sweet Menthol is the third most popular cigarette in Zambia.  It is cheap and is usually sold as single sticks.⁸⁸  On its webpage for Zambia, JTI describes itself  as a leaf farming company, and does not mention that it sells cigarettes in the country. A locally owned company, Roland Imperial,  also sells menthol cigarette brands.⁸⁹

ITC survey data showed a high prevalence of menthol smokers in Zambia, with 43% of smokers choosing the product.⁹⁰ Menthol was most commonly used among younger smokers, those with a middle income, and those that don’t smoke every day. Over a third of smokers indicated that they thought menthol cigarettes were less harmful than non-menthol.⁹⁰

Kenya

ITC survey data from Kenya also suggests a high prevalence of menthol smokers.⁹⁰⁹¹ In 2018, 21% of smokers with a regular cigarette brand smoked menthol or sweet menthol (although Euromonitor estimates that only 7% of cigarette sales are menthol).⁸¹  More women smoke menthol than men in Kenya, and two thirds of smokers believed that menthol is less harmful than other cigarettes.⁹⁰⁹¹

Ethiopia

In 2015, Ethiopia enacted a total flavour ban on all forms of tobacco.

• For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

This was a pre-emptive ban as flavour sales were low. However there has been a lack of enforcement at the retail level.⁷⁵ Flavoured products are not made in Ethiopia and more collaboration with customs is needed to prevent illicit importation.⁷⁵ There is also a lack of awareness that the ban includes waterpipe products.⁸⁰

Since 2017, two years after the ban was enacted, JTI has owned 70%  the state owned tobacco company, NTE.⁹²

Latin America

Menthol cigarettes are popular in Latin America, and increasingly so in some countries.⁸¹ Guatemala and Peru have high market share and high market share growth. There is high market share in Columbia and the Dominican Republic, and high market share growth in Argentina, Bolivia and Costa Rica.⁸¹

Use of flavour capsule cigarettes is particularly high in Chile and Mexico.⁹³  According to BAT’s annual report in 2014,  sales of  flavour capsule cigarettes had increased in the region despite price rises, while overall cigarette sales were down.⁹⁴

A study of over 1,000 retailers located close to schools in Latin American cities (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile and Peru) found that the majority (85%) sold flavoured cigarettes, and most (71%) sold capsule versions.⁶ (Similar findings were reported in Uruguay, a high income country, immediately before the implementation of plain pack regulations in 2020.)⁹⁵

These products were frequently displayed near the point of sale, or confectionary. Some stores also had advertisements and price promotions.⁶ Unconventional flavour descriptors such as “fusion blast” and “ruby ice” were very common.⁹⁶

Brazil

Survey data from 2016-2017 among adult smokers in Brazil found that over 50% supported a ban on menthol and over 60% supported a ban on all additives.⁹⁷ Support did not vary across sociodemographic groups. When menthol smokers were asked what they would do if menthol cigarettes were banned, a third reported they would quit, around 20% would reduce the amount they smoked and a similar number would switch to non-menthol cigarettes. Slightly fewer said they would still find a way to get menthol cigarettes.⁹⁷

ITC survey data from the same period suggested that 8% of smokers with a regular cigarette brand smoked menthol.⁹⁸ 13% believed that menthol cigarettes were less harmful than non-menthol cigarettes, and over a third reported that they were smoother on the throat and chest.  Nearly two thirds  of surveyed smokers supported a complete ban on all cigarette additives, including flavourings.⁹⁸

An online sample of women aged 16- 26 (smokers and non-smokers) preferred packs with flavour descriptors.⁹⁹

• The tobacco industry has used a range to tactics to undermine and delay Brazil’s menthol ban. For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

Chile

In 2013, Chile sought to implement a law banning substances that cause higher levels of addiction, harm or risk, leading to tobacco industry resistance and interference.⁸⁰

• For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

Mexico

Studies of retailers in Mexican cities, found that the majority sold menthol and flavoured products, and more than half of stores situated near schools sold flavour capsule cigarettes.¹⁰⁰¹⁰¹ Many flavoured cigarettes have descriptors which suggest there is a flavour, but the type of flavour is unclear: chemical analysis of dual flavoured cigarettes suggested flavours were menthol and another flavour, for example fruit.¹⁰²

A study in Mexico City found that colour and flavour descriptors on cigarette packs made the products more appealing, and some smokers believed they would taste better.¹⁰³

Guatemala

A study of convenience store retailers in Guatemala found that all sold flavoured tobacco products.¹⁰⁴

The majority (88%) of indoor tobacco advertisements in Guatemala were found to be for capsule cigarettes.¹⁰⁴

South East Asia & Western Pacific

There is high market share of menthol/flavour in India, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand, and high market share growth in Vietnam.⁸¹  A 2010 study noted that governments in the region had no legislation banning exotic flavours of cigarettes and cigarettes with new flavours had appeared in Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.¹⁰⁵

Philippines

Menthol has been advertised to appeal to young women in the Philippines since the 1970s with menthol brands common for many decades.¹⁰⁶ PMI, JTI, BAT and Korea Tobacco & Ginseng (KT&G) all sell flavoured capsule cigarettes in the Philippines.¹⁰⁷

Menthol packs studied in the Philippines were harder than non-menthol (for capsule protection) giving a quality feel. Flavoured capsule brands had a greater technological appeal,¹⁰⁷ and packs were rated as more attractive by young adults.¹⁰⁸

Blue and white packs were perceived to be less harmful than other colours, as were the descriptors ‘light’ and ‘cool’, whereas the term ‘strong’ was perceived as more harmful.¹⁰⁸  Researchers called for greater action and support for banning flavour additives.

Malaysia

In Malaysia, menthol cigarette marketing has been aimed at young people and women.  In the 1980s Brown and Williamson’s Newport menthol cigarettes were marketed in Malaysia with youthful American images and were sold at a cheap price point.¹⁰⁹ An internal document from 1993 reveals how the company was developing sweet and fruit flavours for the Malaysian market. ¹⁰⁹¹¹⁰ A 2003 study noted that the menthol variant of Cartier Vendome (a BAT brand at the time) was described as ‘pearl tipped’ so likely to appeal to women.¹¹¹

In 2013, vanilla, mint and fruit flavoured cigarettes were on sale, and strawberry cigarette packs with pink packaging were documented.¹¹²

China

In China ‘flavour capsule’ was found to be one of the most common cigarette terms used in online tobacco marketing.  One website explicitly linked flavour capsules with female smokers.¹¹³

Indonesia

In Indonesia the dominant cigarettes are kreteks which are flavoured with cloves.  Industry attempts to introduce their own cloved flavoured products had failed at least to 2004.¹¹⁴  In 2009 PMI and BAT acquired two domestic manufacturers which allowed them access to the kretek market.¹¹⁵ In 2009 PMI launched the first super slims kretek for women and Marlboro black menthol for young men.  By 2012 BAT had launched several kretek brands. Both companies were aware that kreteks  are particularly carcinogenic due to the presence of toxic chemical compounds: Anethole, Coumarin and Eugenol.¹¹⁵

In Indonesia the flip lid of the cigarette packet was used by Esse (owned by Korean Tobacco & Ginseng, KT&G) to promote the brand with phrases evoking flavour, like “sweet surprise” and “its honey”.  Research found seven cigarette brands with capsules.  Flavours included mint, menthol, berry and honey.¹¹⁶

Eastern Mediterranean

There is high market share growth in in Pakistan and Egypt .⁸¹

• See also Waterpipe for information on the role of flavours in promoting these products.

Eastern Europe

Data shows that in Russia menthol/flavour has both a high market share and high market share growth.⁸¹

Other LMICs in the region with high market share growth are Ukraine, Bosnia Herzegovina, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.⁸¹

Relevant Links

WHO Advisory note: banning menthol in tobacco products (2016)

WHO Case studies for regulatory approaches to tobacco products: menthol in tobacco products (2018)

WHO FCTC decision on banning waterpipe flavour (2016)

A global map of menthol bans is available on Tobacco Atlas: Product Sales

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco
• Menthol Cigarettes: Industry Interference in the EU and UK

TCRG Research

A growing menace: menthol and flavoured tobacco products in LMIC, M. Zatonski, K. Silver, S. Plummer, R. Hiscock, Tobacco Induced Diseases, 2022;20(April):39, doi:10.18332/tid/146366
STOP research summary (May 2022)

Marketing of flavour capsule cigarettes: a systematic review, C. Kyriakos, M. Zatonski, F. Filippidis, Tobacco Control, Published Online First: 18 January 2022, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-057082[/ref]

Flavour capsule cigarette use and perceptions: a systematic review, C.N. Kyriakos, M.Z. Zatoński, F.T. Filippidis, Tobacco Control, Published Online First: 04 October 2021, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056837

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to TCRG publications.

References

The post Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• Philip Morris International (PMI) is increasingly moving into the ‘cessation space’.
• The US Food and Drug Administration denied PMI “reduced risk” status for its heated tobacco product IQOS. Nevertheless, PMI continues to push it as a cessation product, including in countries where it is currently banned.
• PMI uses misleading terminology when talking about IQOS use and “quitting”, and conflates its e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTP), leading to confusion among the public, and potentially governments.
• PMI’s data for global IQOS use, used to promote the HTP and present it as a successful product around the world, are based in part on commercial data which is not publicly available and is skewed by data from Japan where e-cigarettes are banned.
• PMI’s ‘switching’ estimates are short term and downplay dual use of IQOS with cigarettes and the potential for initiation by non-smokers, including youth.
• There is very little evidence that IQOS is effective as a quit tool at the individual level or population level.
• Not all governments are prepared to accept IQOS as a cessation tool.

Background

Philip Morris International (PMI) has stated that it has a vision of a “smoke-free” future and that it intends to move its business away from combustible tobacco products entirely.¹¹⁷¹¹⁸ PMI envisages itself and its heated tobacco product (HTP), IQOS, as central in this vision. However, independent evidence does not support many of PMI’s claims about its product, including its claims about risk reduction and its effectiveness in helping people stop smoking. PMI’s commercial goal is not to stop people using tobacco altogether, but to ensure they continue to buy its products, including IQOS, and to increase the numbers of people doing so.¹¹⁹

PMI uses its own research and market data to produce estimates about users, IQOS usage, and the use of other tobacco products. While research on IQOS use is available on the PMI Science website and in some external publications (see below), PMI’s methodology for calculating its global estimates of IQOS use is not transparent. While there has been some independent research on the prevalence of HTP use (including IQOS), as of January 2023, PMI’s estimates for the total numbers of IQOS users globally were yet to be independently verified.

The Philip Morris company has a history of claiming that it promotes cessation.¹²⁰ It even created its own, limited cessation programme called “QuitAssist”, launched in 2004 before PMI separated from parent company Altria.¹²⁰¹²¹ This was not proven to be effective, but gave the company opportunities to engage with public health and government.¹²⁰ (See also the page on Duke University and its connections to QuitAssist)

This page describes some of PMI’s more recent attempts to enter the ‘cessation space’ with IQOS. It then looks at relevant PMI statements from media interviews, press releases and industry publications, and the evidence it uses to support its claims, including that submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It summarises the independent, peer reviewed academic research relating to the use of IQOS, including prevalence, dual and poly use, and youth initiation. Finally, it describes the reaction from the governments of Australia, New Zealand and Mexico in 2020, in response to PMI’s attempts to introduce IQOS to their countries and frame them as cessation products.

What is cessation?

Use of the terms “cessation” and “quitting” varies, even within public health, and can be conceptualised in different ways, for example:

1. Quitting/cessation of smoked tobacco products
2. Quitting/cessation of any tobacco product
3. Quitting/cessation of any nicotine product

Products containing, or derived from, tobacco do not necessarily fall neatly into these categories, as definitions vary globally for the purposes of regulation and cessation.

The tobacco industry is able to take advantage of this diversity of opinion,¹²² and different attitudes towards harm reduction more broadly, to further its own commercial interests. For example, HTP manufacturers have gone to great lengths to frame HTPs as “smokefree” in order for potential consumers, governments and regulators to view them differently from combustible tobacco products, like cigarettes.¹¹⁹¹²³ However, HTPs contain tobacco leaf and are therefore tobacco products.

PMI attempts to re-enter the ‘cessation space’ with IQOS

As governments increasingly struggle to fund their public health services and set up new smoking cessation (or ‘quit’) programmes, new opportunities have emerged for the tobacco industry to present itself as a solution to the problem it has created: getting consumers hooked on cigarettes, a deadly and addictive product.^124125126127

Proposed £1 billion fund for UK stop-smoking services

In February 2020, an investigation by The Guardian newspaper and Channel 4 TV’s Dispatches programme exposed PMI’s attempt to fund and run cessation services in the UK, in exchange for being able to promote IQOS.¹²⁸ Leaked documents showed that the company planned to create a GB£1 billion “tobacco transition fund” to be spent by UK health authorities, with GB£15 million to go to Public Health England to “facilitate switching”.¹²⁸ In exchange, PMI expected the lifting of restrictions on the advertising and marketing of IQOS and e-cigarettes. The Guardian reported that PMI encouraged a UK Member of Parliament, Kevin Barron, to present an (unsuccessful) bill proposing this in parliament in October 2018.¹²⁸

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) described this move by PMI as “completely unacceptable” and expressed concerns that the company’s ability to recruit a previously anti-tobacco MP to further its business interests was a sign of increasing normalisation of the industry in the UK.¹²⁸¹²⁹ Philip Morris’ statement to The Guardian indicated the range of its lobbying in the UK, in its attempt to co-opt existing cessation campaigns and undermine the ‘polluter pays’ principle proposed by ASH:¹²⁹

“We have made this point time and time again to MPs, civil servants, local councillors, journalists and the broader public. What this story really shows is that Philip Morris has been consistent in its efforts to make smoke-free 2030 a reality.”¹²⁸

Offered free IQOS to cessation services in New Zealand

In August 2019, a Radio New Zealand (RNZ) investigation reported that health officials had been lobbied by PMI to have IQOS included in public cessation programmes.¹³⁰¹³¹ The company proposed supplying free IQOS devices in exchange for “community-based trials, data collection and monitoring”.¹³⁰ It is not known if PMI were expecting the programmes to use IQOS exclusively, or alongside other evidence-based cessation tools. RNZ also reported that PMI had approached an advocacy group working with people on low incomes and had sold IQOS  to Maori groups at half price.¹³⁰ New Zealand’s Director General of Health, Ashley Bloomfield, said that PMI was:

“doing its best on all fronts to … legitimise both its product and its role in being part of smoking cessation initiatives around the country.”¹³⁰

Bloomfield instructed health officials to reject PMI’s approaches and reminded them of their obligation under FCTC article 5.3.¹³⁰¹³²

Funding cessation programmes through Foundation for a Smoke-Free World

PMI set up, and is the sole funder of, the Foundation for A Smoke Free World (FSFW). FSFW funds a number of cessation-related projects globally and, in 2020, appeared to be expanding this area of work. The Centre for Health Research and Education (CHRE), a private company run by an ex-employee of British American Tobacco (BAT) and a UK doctor, received grants from FSFW for cessation work in the UK, and to fund the scoping of work in India.¹³³

In July 2020, FSFW published a country report on India.¹³⁴ This covered research on cessation in India, mentioning nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and “cessation medications”, and perceived gaps in provision, including the training of health care professionals and the establishment of tobacco cessation centres. In a section titled “Policies Prohibiting Tobacco and Harm Reduction Products in India”, it referred to India’s ban on e-cigarettes and other products and stated that “There is a growing demand for reduced-risk products globally, as well as evidence on e-cigarettes as a potential cessation tool, and it is important to consider the implications of this ban”.¹³⁴ However, there appeared to be no further detail, or policy recommendations relating to cessation.

The Centre for Research Excellence: Indigenous Sovereignty and Smoking (COREISS) is a private company which presents itself as an independent scientific organisation whose stated goal is reducing tobacco-related harms among indigenous peoples. COREISS was funded by FSFW to “build a global center for smoking cessation and harm reduction in indigenous people” in New Zealand.¹³³

For more information see the CHRE and COREISS pages. Details of other FSFW grants can be found on the FSFW grantees page. FSFW also funds a number of third-party organisations which campaign for a greater role, and fewer restrictions, on newer nicotine and tobacco products.  See for example the International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations (INNCO), Knowledge-Action-Change (K-A-C) and Pakistan Alliance for Nicotine and Tobacco Harm Reduction (PANTHR). PMI also directly funds Factasia.

The risks of using IQOS vs quitting

PMI portrays IQOS as a “reduced risk” product.¹¹⁹ In July 2020, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted PMI a “modified exposure” order but denied a “reduced risk” order, acknowledging that while IQOS reduces exposure to some potentially harmful chemicals it has not been shown to reduce the harm or risks of tobacco-related diseases.¹³⁵

In July 2020, the WHO stated that there was a large gap in knowledge on HTPs, as they have not been on the market long enough to gather data on their health effects and broader impact.

“Conclusions cannot yet be drawn about their potential to attract new, young tobacco users (gateway effect), or the interaction in dual use with other conventional tobacco products and e-cigarettes”.¹³⁶

The Tobacco Control Research Group (TCRG) published a STOP briefing, and British Medical Journal editorial pointing out the potential for the misrepresentation of the FDA’s decision outside the US and advising that smokers trying to quit should use evidence-based methods, and only use HTPs “as a last resort”.¹³⁷¹³⁸

Creating confusion around science is a long-standing tactic of the tobacco industry. For more information see Influencing Science

Redefining “quitting” as “switching”

Although PMI uses the word “quitting” in its public-facing media statements and interviews, it frames the concept in terms of  “switching”, “converting”, or “making the change” to IQOS, rather than quitting tobacco use entirely.¹³⁹¹⁴⁰ In its September 2020 “Scientific Update”, the word “quitting” appears once, compared to 20 uses of  “switch”¹⁴¹ (“cessation” is only used in a summary of an academic study on e-cigarettes).

PMI has denied that the name “IQOS” stands for “I Quit Ordinary Smoking”.¹⁴²¹⁴³ However, Stanford University research on PMI’s IQOS marketing campaigns noted that even the use of the letter Q in the brand name reinforces the sense that the product is designed for ‘quitting’.¹⁴⁴

The WHO points out that consumers and regulators are likely to confuse or conflate the terms “switch” and “quit”, blurring the line between the two concepts, and helping the tobacco industry to position their HTPs as cessation aids (as well as arguing that they should be exempted from smoke-free regulation).¹²⁴

PMI’s estimates of the numbers of IQOS users are widely reported in media coverage around the world, and there is evidence that they are also being used by PMI to lobby governments to encourage governments to open their markets to IQOS.¹³⁷

For more information see PMI’s promotion of IQOS using FDA MRTP order

Conflating HTPs and E-cigarettes

PMI has also appeared to conflate HTPs and e-cigarettes (also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems, or ENDS) in its marketing. This has the potential to sow further confusion.¹³⁸ For example, in its ‘Hold My Light’ campaign, it said that “similar to most e-cigarettes” HTPs produce a “a nicotine-containing vapour with much lower amounts of harmful chemicals than found in cigarette smoke”.¹¹⁹ This was described by Bath researchers as an attempt “to piggyback HTPs onto the relative acceptability of e-cigarettes as a form of harm reduction in some countries that permit their sale”.¹¹⁹

PMI had an e-cigarette called IQOS Mesh on the market in the UK until April 2020, when it appeared to have been withdrawn. PMI presented IQOS Mesh, now apparently rebranded as IQOS VEEV, as a product suitable for “e-vapor users, adult smokers considering the e-vapor category and dual users of e-vapor and heated tobacco products”. ¹⁴⁵¹⁴⁶ Consumers are likely to find this confusing, given the similar name to PMI’s HTP.

Researchers found that in New Zealand PMI conflated heated tobacco products (HTPs) with ENDS in its marketing material, with both products sold in dedicated stores called “IQ Vape”.¹⁴⁷ Price promotions for IQOS products were “explicitly encouraging consumers to dual use an HTP with ENDS”.¹⁴⁷ Changes identified in PMI’s marketing principles in 2019 indicated that IQOS HTPs can be promoted to users of other nicotine products, not just cigarette smokers, which could include former smokers using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).¹⁴⁷ The researchers also identified conflation in PMI’s descriptions of risk profiles, noting that, while PMI’s press releases argue that the public lacks clear information on products and risk:

“by conflating HTPs with ENDS, the company risks doing the very thing it says it opposes: propagating confusion and misinformation amongst consumers.”¹⁴⁷

IQ Vape has also been registered by PMI as a trademark in New Zealand.^148149150 Europe,¹⁵¹ and elsewhere.¹⁵²

While there have been randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using e-cigarettes to aid cessation,¹⁵³ at the time of publication there had been no RCTs testing the use of IQOS as a cessation aid.

PMI may also be conflating its products through business relationships. In Ireland, PMI joined the e-cigarette trade association Vape Business Ireland.¹⁵⁴ In 2021, PMI’s membership was listed on VBI’s website as IQOS, rather than the e-cigarettes brand Veev.¹⁵⁵ See also the page on UK retailer VPZ, which has a close financial relationship with Philip Morris Ltd, and markets IOQS HTPs in its stores as well as e-cigarettes.

• For more information on Mesh and VEEV and Vape Business Ireland, see E-cigarettes: Philip Morris International.

IQOS “Use”, “Switching” and “Conversion” – What Does PMI Mean?

The term IQOS “user” was used frequently in PMI annual reports and presentations to shareholders from 2018 onwards and refers to the “IQOS user base” when reporting its financial results.¹⁵⁶

PMI defines an IQOS “user” as an adult who has used the product for at least 5% of their total tobacco consumption for a period of 7 days.¹⁵⁷ A “predominant user” would need to have used IQOS for at least 70% of their consumption and a “converted user” for 95%. It also has a broad category for those who use IQOS for between 5% and 70% of their consumption, which it calls a “situational user”.¹⁵⁷

Conversion rates are a commonly used metric in tobacco research, referring to the rate of transfer from first use of a cigarette (commonly youth use) to regular, daily smoking.¹⁵⁸ PMI’s definitions do not appear to be based on any classifications commonly used in prevalence and cessation surveys, and it does not explain its rationale for how it developed its percentage bands. While the bands may serve to categorise users of IQOS, they do not predict cessation success or equate to the reduction of harm.

In February 2020, PMI stated that 14 million people were using IQOS. According to PMI, 10 million IQOS users (71% of the total) had stopped smoking and “switched” to IQOS, and an estimated 4 million were “in various stages of conversion” (i.e. still smoking cigarettes).¹⁵⁹PMI regularly updates these figures in its public statements. In September 2020, CEO Andre Calantzopoulos gave a figure of 11.2 million as having ‘switched’ to IQOS.¹⁶⁰ By the end of 2021, PMI stated that this had risen to 21.2 million.¹⁶¹

PMI states that its “aspiration” is for the number of smokers switching to IQOS to exceed 40 million by 2025.¹⁶²

What are its estimates based on?

It is not clear how PMI calculates its user estimates. In its presentations and corporate reports, it states that they are based on a combination of “PMI financials or estimates, IQOS user panels and PMI market research” (see Image 1 below).¹⁶³Information on IQOS sales and revenue from IQOS (but not profit) is reported in company statements, but PMI does not share the raw data from its user panels or market research.

Image 1: PMI’s estimates of IQOS users 2018- 2019 (Source: PMI, 2019 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Results presentation, 6 February 2020)

In 2019, PMI said that it would conduct a series of annual surveys to estimate the prevalence and use patterns of IQOS and other nicotine products in Germany, Italy and part of the UK.¹⁶⁴ PMI stated that “the results of the first year data analysis are expected to be available by June 2019”. As of January 2023, these results did not appear to be publicly available.

The “PMI Science” website presents some findings relating to the use of IQOS based on surveys conducted in Japan between 2016 and 2018.¹⁶⁵¹⁶⁶

The problem with “conversion”

PMI stated in a 2018 presentation to shareholders that “High full conversion rates for an RRP [Reduced Risk Product] product [sic] are of fundamental importance” to consumers, the company and regulators as it “underscores a higher potential to meaningfully improve public health, as [IQOS] has a demonstrated ability to switch current smokers to proven better alternatives than cigarettes”.¹⁶⁷

However, PMI’s estimates for those who have “converted” to IQOS are based on a seven day assessment only,¹⁶⁸ which limits the ability to generalise the findings as a reflection of sustained behavioural change. It is likely that the number of people who use IQOS exclusively is lower than PMI’s estimates.¹¹⁹ PMI’s statements are based on the assumption that current dual users of tobacco and IQOS will all give up smoking cigarettes, and that the process of “conversion” will not be reversed.¹¹⁹¹⁶⁹

PMI does not systematically publish raw data on the quit intentions of its users. Prior to the EU menthol ban, Philip Morris Ltd (PMI’s UK subsidiary) reported that 15% of UK consumers would try to quit in response to the ban, while over 50% would consider switching to IQOS “once made aware of this option”. It appears that this survey involved showing participants the IQOS device, but it is not known if they were shown other HTPs, e-cigarettes, smokeless tobacco or medical cessation tools, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).¹⁷⁰ This finding has not been independently verified and other survey data does not support PMI’s claims. (For more details see Menthol Cigarettes: Industry Interference in the EU and UK)

Dual and poly use

Evidence suggests even low levels of ongoing smoking can be deadly.¹⁷¹ Thus, if HTPs are to have a potential public health benefit, they must not only reduce the  risk of harm and disease compared to cigarettes and other smoked products (currently unproven), but also be used by smokers exclusively, not just ‘most of the time’.

Yet, there is emerging independent evidence of considerable dual and poly use in countries where PMI says that IQOS is helping smokers to quit cigarettes. Multiple independent studies amongst have found many HTP users also concurrently use other tobacco and nicotine products, particularly cigarettes.^{172173174175176177178} In two of these studies, the authors note their findings suggest HTPs may serve as “complements” to cigarettes rather than an aid to quitting them.¹⁷²¹⁷³

These patterns of dual and poly use are confirmed by PMI’s own evidence. For example, 2017 and 2019 conference posters based on PMI’s surveys in Japan identify, yet downplay, significant dual and poly use of IQOS, cigarettes and other nicotine products. ¹⁶⁵¹⁷⁹

Apart from this not being a representative sample of the global population, e-cigarettes are banned in Japan, meaning that IQOS has little competition from other products. As the FDA noted:

“Consumers may be more likely to try using IQOS if non‐cigarette tobacco products such as nicotine‐containing e‐cigarettes are not readily available”.¹³⁵

In its review, the FDA created its own chart based on PMI’s perception and behaviour studies and definitions (image 2 below). This showed that across five countries, significantly more people also used cigarettes (dual use) or reverted to cigarettes, than exclusively, or even predominantly, used IQOS.¹³⁵

Image 2: FDA chart showing dual use, based on PMI’s data (Source: FDA)¹³⁵

Academic review by McKelvey et al. found that PMI’s consumer perception and behaviour studies were fundamentally flawed in multiple ways: findings were extrapolated from a diary task to the whole sample, when only half of the participants had completed it; studies did not count use of other tobacco products, only cigarettes and IQOS; studies were limited to a 4-6 week period, when HeatSticks were provided for free (giving a price advantage and potential bias, meaning that the results were not representative of smokers or HTP users); and they did not allow sufficient time to identify how many IQOS users might “switch back” to cigarettes.¹⁸⁰ In addition, the authors stated that PMI had mis-represented its own finding around participants’ quit intentions and downplayed the likelihood of dual or poly use.¹⁸⁰

Euromonitor International (which receives project funding from the Foundation for a Smoke Free World and PMI) published a report in May 2020, which included some general findings on nicotine use from surveys it conducted in 2019 and 2020.¹⁸¹ In part, this survey was designed to “understand the extent and nature of dual and multiple formats”.¹⁸¹ The report noted that the HTP market is still relatively small, and that dual and poly use is most common among smokers who also use e-cigarettes and/or other products (which were not specified in this report). It also stated that in the case of HTPs, only 15% of users reported that they were planning to quit completely in the next year, and that this was “the smallest proportion of consumers of any category”.¹⁸¹ Euromonitor suggests this is due to the “immaturity” of the HTP category compared to other tobacco and nicotine product categories, such as e-cigarettes.¹⁸¹

Another Euromonitor report from April 2020, based on its nicotine survey, stated that around 20% of e-cigarette users planned to move to HTPs (up from 18% in 2019) and around 30% of HTP users planned to move to e-cigarettes. Given the large size of the e-cigarette market this would lead to a significant “net gain for heated tobacco”.¹⁸²

For information on the global HTP market see Heated Tobacco Products

PMI is careful in public statements not to refer to IQOS users as “smokers”, even when they also smoke cigarettes. Stanford University researchers have pointed out that dual use of cigarettes and IQOS, where smoking is not allowed for example in “IQOS Friendly Places”, may in practice “serve to deepen nicotine addiction and make cessation less probable”.¹⁴⁴

HTPs may attract non-smokers

PMI also downplays data on non-smokers who start using IQOS. In work based on its Japanese surveys, PMI states that “initiation and re-initiation of tobacco use with IQOS was minimal in both surveys and years” but does not explain how these figures were derived.¹⁶⁵ PMI’s studies have actually found up to 2% of registered Japanese IQOS users were not nicotine or tobacco users when they started using IQOS.¹⁸³¹⁶⁵ Further, up to 6% of non-smokers and up to 15% of former smokers expressed an intention to use IQOS in PMI’s Japan and US surveys.¹⁸⁴¹⁸⁵ None of these studies have been published in peer-reviewed journals.

There is some evidence emerging that HTPs may be attractive to those who have never smoked cigarettes, including young people.¹⁸⁶ While there is currently little evidence of a potential ‘gateway effect’ (i.e. people who don’t smoke or use nicotine products start using HTPs and then move onto conventional cigarettes), any tobacco or nicotine product uptake would clearly lead to an increase in harms to health.¹⁵³ Research from Italy (a country where HTPs were introduced at a favourable tax rate, and a key IQOS market) found that 45% of Italy’s 740,000 IQOS users, and over half of the 1.2 million people who were expressed an intention to try IQOS, were people who had never smoked.¹⁸⁷¹⁸⁸ This finding was supported by research from South Korea, which found that HTPs were likely to be attractive to youth who had not previously used any tobacco products.¹⁸⁹ The FDA noted that:

“the currently available evidence suggests that youth uptake of IQOS is currently low in countries where it has been measured. However, given that IQOS is still a relatively new product, the uptake and use patterns among youth in these markets, or any market that may start selling IQOS, is unclear”.¹³⁵

Its marketing authorisation for IQOS in the US requires PMI to conduct post-market assessments to “ensure that youth exposure to tobacco marketing is being minimized”.¹³⁵

Analysis of surveys conducted in Canada, England and the US, published in 2020, also found that non-smokers were interested in trying the product.¹⁹⁰

IQOS rejected as a cessation tool

There is very little evidence that IQOS is effective as a quit tool at the individual level or population level. A 2022 Cochrane review of the evidence on HTPs for cessation concluded:

“Heated tobacco probably exposes people to fewer toxins than cigarettes, but possibly more than not using any tobacco. Falls in cigarette sales appeared to speed up following the launch of heated tobacco in Japan, but we are uncertain whether this is caused by people switching from cigarettes to heated tobacco”.¹⁹¹

New Zealand

When instructing public health officials to reject PMI’s offer of free IQOS in August 2019, the Director-General of Health stated that “the health sector does not share the same goals or aspirations of this industry”.¹³² He also referred to PMI’s funding of FSFW, and discouraged engagement with COREISS, stating that “there is a range of alternative sources of information and advice on smoking cessation and the possible use of vaping products to support cessation, including for Māori”.¹³²

Australia

Despite intense lobbying by PMI to allow the sale of IQOS, in August 2020, the Australian government’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) rejected the sale of HTPs in Australia.¹⁹²¹⁹³.

The TGA found that PMI’s assertion that smoking rates in Australia had “stagnated” was inaccurate, and that rates were in fact continuing to decline. In addition to uncertainty over nicotine levels and general health risks (which included PMI’s own research findings), the TGA also highlighted the concern that HTPs might still attract people who had never smoked, including youth: “there would be no ability to restrict the supply of HTPs to smokers seeking to quit”.¹⁹²

In Australia, nicotine products, including HTPs, are available via a medical prescription for smoking cessation. The TGA concluded that as a consequence, there was no justification to introduce “a new nicotine product for non-therapeutic use”.¹⁹²

Mexico

In September 2020, the Mexican Ministry of Health reaffirmed the ban on the import of HTPs, made clear that IQOS had not been granted any form of reduced risk status in Mexico and stated that it did not support its use as a tool to stop smoking.¹⁹⁴ For more information see: Heated Tobacco Products

Why does this matter?

TCRG researchers have stated that until the relative health risks are determined, HTPs, including IQOS, have no public health role:¹³⁸

“There is currently no evidence that IQOS helps smokers quit. Smokers wishing to quit should use products shown to be safe and effective in line with national and international guidance.”¹³⁷¹⁹⁵

PMI’s attempts to establish or take over cessation programmes could have a damaging effect on public health. Writing about Philip Morris’s historical efforts, MacDaniel et al concluded that:

“Such endeavors have the potential to inflict real harm by competing with more effective programs and by helping to maintain a tobacco-favorable policy environment. If PM truly wanted to support cessation, it could drop legal and other challenges to public policies that discourage smoking.”¹²⁰

In 2023, the same statement can be applied to PMI.

Relevant Links

• Addiction at any cost: Philip Morris International Uncovered, Stopping Tobacco Organisations and Products/Tobacco Control Research Group, 2020
• STOP/TCRG, FDA does not rule that IQOS reduces tobacco-related harm, yet PMI still claims victory, Issue brief, July 2020
• WHO statement on heated tobacco products and the US FDA decision regarding IQOS, July 2020

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Harm Reduction
• Heated Tobacco Products
• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International
• PMI Promotion of IQOS Using FDA MRTP Order

TCRG Research

• Tobacco industry messaging around harm: Narrative framing in PMI and BAT press releases and annual reports 2011 to 2021, I. Fitzpatrick, S. Dance, K. Silver, M. Violini, T.R. Hird, Frontiers in Public Health, 18 October 2022. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.958354
• Corporate communication of the relative health risks of IQOS through a webchat service, S. Braznell, J.R. Branston, A.B. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, Online First: 03 March 2022. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056999
• PMI New Zealand conflates IQOS heated tobacco products with electronic nicotine delivery systems, L. Robertson, J. Hoek, K. Silver, Tobacco Control Published Online First: 19 November 2021. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056964
• US regulator adds to confusion around heated tobacco products, A.B. Gilmore, S. Braznell, BMJ, 2020;370:m3528
• Understanding the emergence of the tobacco industry’s use of the term tobacco harm reduction in order to inform public health policy, S. Peeters, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 2015,24(2):182-189

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to TCRG publications.

References

The post PMI’s IQOS: Use, “Switching” and “Quitting” appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Philip Morris International (PMI) is the largest tobacco company in the world (excluding the Chinese National Tobacco Corporation).¹⁹⁶ The company is headquartered in New York in the United States (US), but also based operationally in Lausanne, Switzerland and Hong Kong. According to the Associated Press, Altria decided to separate Philip Morris USA and its international operations in order to “clear the international tobacco business from the legal and regulatory constraints facing its domestic counterpart, Philip Morris USA”.¹⁹⁷

In 2018, PMI and its subsidiaries sold its products in over 180 markets, selling cigarettes, other tobacco products and newer nicotine and tobacco products. The company reported in 2019 that it held 28.4% of the global market for cigarette and heated tobacco products (HTPS) excluding the US and China.¹⁹⁸ The company owned six of the top 15 international cigarette brands in 2018. Its global cigarette brands are Marlboro (the world’s bestselling international brand), Merit, Parliament, Virginian S, L&M, Philip Morris, Bond Street, Chesterfield, Lark, Muratti, Next and Red & White. The company reported owning a market share of at least 15% or over in 100 countries in 2018, although in the UK PMI held only fourth position for cigarette market share behind Imperial Tobacco, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) and British American Tobacco (BAT).¹⁹⁹

According to Euromonitor International, PMI’s global share of the cigarette market (by retail volume) was under 14% in 2018, and fell to 12% in 2020 (figures rounded). ²⁰⁰

On 27 August 2019, global news outlets reported that PMI and Altria were considering a merger to reunite the brands that had split in 2007.^201202203 However the merger was called off the next month, in response to news that the FDA was considering a ban on flavoured e-cigarettes.²⁰⁴²⁰⁵ On March 21, 2018, PMI acquired Tabacalera Costarricense, S.A. and Mediola y Compañía, S.A. for USD$95 million, which sell Derby, Marlboro and L&M cigarettes in Costa Rica.¹⁹⁸

Employees or Board Members: Past and Present

Jacek Olczak was appointed the Chief Executive Officer of PMI in May 2021.²⁰⁶ Previously he was the company’s Chief Operating Officer. He succeeded André Calantzopoulos who was appointed Executive Chairman of the Board. The previous chairman Louis C. Camilleri, stepped down in Decemer 2020. A full list of the company’s leadership team can be accessed at PMI’s website. Other persons that currently work for, or have previously been employed with, the company:

Massimo Andolina | Chris Argent | Drago Azinovic | Emmanuel Babeau | Werner Barth | Charles Bendotti | Frank de Rooij | Frederic de Wilde | Suzanne Rich Folsom | Stacey Kennedy | Martin King | Michael Kunst | Andreas Kurali | Bin Li | Marco Mariotti | Mario Massroli | Deepak Mishra | Silke Muenster | John O’Mullane | Paul Riley | Marian Salzman | Gregoire Verdeaux | Michael Voegele | Stefano Volpetti | Jerry Whitson |  Martin J. Barrington | David Bernick | Bertrand Bonvin | Harold Brown | Patrick Brunel | Mathis Cabiallavetta | Louis C. Camilleri | Andrew Cave | Herman Cheung | Kevin Click | Marc S. Firestone | John Dudley Fishburn | Jon Huenemann | Even Hurwitz | Jennifer Li | Graham Mackay | Sergio Marchionne | Kate Marley | Kalpana Morparia | Jim Mortensen | Lucio A. Noto | Matteo Pellegrini | Robert B. Polet | Ashok Rammohan | Carlos Slim Helú | Julie Soderlund | Hermann Waldemer | Stephen M. Wolf | Miroslaw Zielinski

Affiliations

Memberships

In 2019, PMI declared membership of the following organisations on the European Transparency Register:²⁰⁷

The American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union | American European Community Association (AECA) | American Chamber of Commerce of Lithuania | Ass. Industrial Portuguesa (AIP) | Business Europe | Centromarca | CEOE | Czech Association Branded Goods | Czech Foodstuff Chamber | Economiesuisse | Estonian Chamber of Commerce | European Communities Trademark Association (ECTA) | European Policy Centre (EPC) | Kangaroo Group | Latvian Chamber of Commerce | Latvian Traders Association | Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists | MARQUES | Spanish Tobacco Roundtable | VBO-FBE

PMI had previously listed memberships of: International Trademark Association (INTA) | The Trans-Atlantic Business Council (TABC) | | European Risk Forum | European Smokeless Tobacco Council (ESTOC) | British Chamber of Commerce | Public Affairs Council | APRAM | LES France | AmCham Germany | Bund fur Lebensmittelrecht & Lebensmittelkunde | Europaischer Wirtschaftssenat (EWS) | Wirtschaftsbeirat der Union e.V. | American Chamber of Commerce of Estonia | American Lithuanian Business Council | Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists | Investors’ Forum | AmCham Spain | Unindustria (Confindustria) | Consumer Packaging Alliance | British Brands Group | Foodstuff Chamber The company is also a donor to the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco Growing Foundation (ECLT), alongside BAT, Imperial Brands, JTI and Swedish Match, among others.²⁰⁸

In May 2015, ECLT and the International Labour Organization (ILO) entered into an agreement to develop global guidance on occupational health and safety with regards to child labour in the tobacco industry.²⁰⁹ PMI was a member of the Confederation of European Community Cigarette Manufacturers (CECCM), but left in 2006 following a dispute with other members.²¹⁰

Consultancies

PMI has worked with numerous Public Relations (PR) and law consultancies:

• In 2020 and 2021 PMI released white papers and held events on public trust in science in partnership with the Industry Transformation Coalition.
• In January 2020, PMI released a white paper entitled “Unsmoke Your Mind: Pragmatic Answers to Tough Questions for a Smoke-Free Future”. The company enlisted the consulting firm Povaddo, which works across public affairs, strategy and research,²¹¹ to conduct an opinion-based survey of smokers across 14 countries.²¹² The report was heavily criticised in The Lancet medical journal (see below)²¹³ who pointed out that its findings were based on a “self-funded online survey”.²¹³ In July 2020, PMI published another white paper called “In Support of the Primacy of Science”, which was also based on online surveys conducted by Povaddo, on the public’s views on science.²¹⁴²¹⁵ In March 2021 PMI released the results of a third online survey, conducted by Povaddo in 20 countries, on public attitudes to newer nicotine and tobacco products and collaboration between governments and tobacco companies.²¹⁶ Povaddo has conducted previous research for PMI.²¹⁷
• In December 2019, researchers and academic institutions received invitations from the consulting firm, Handshake, to commission research on behalf of PMI on how companies navigate corporate transformation.²¹⁸
• In 2016, Philip Morris UK was a client of London-based PR and communications company Instinctif Partners.
• That same year, media also linked Brussels-based PR company Pantarhei Advisors to Philip Morris.
• In 2014, UK-based Media Intelligence Partners was PMI’s media contact during Sir Cyril Chantler’s plain packaging review.
• In 2014, German PR company Communications & Network Consulting AG (CNC) listed Philip Morris as a client on the EU Transparency Register.
• In that same year, Luxembourg-based Felula SA, a one-person consultancy run by Serge Estgen, listed PMI as its client on the EU Transparency Register.
• In 2013, Edinburgh-based Halogen Communications supported PMI’s opposition to Scotland’s plans to introduce Plain Packaging.
• In 2012 and 2013, PMI worked with London-based PR and media company Pepper Public Affairs on PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Media Campaign.
• In 2012, the UK branch of Crosby Textor Group, helped PMI oppose Plain packaging in the UK.
• Law firm Clifford Chance has a history of lobbying for PMI in the UK and European Union (EU). In 2009, the firm submitted anonymous Freedom of Information requests to a UK university on behalf of the tobacco company, and in 2011 and 2012 Clifford Chance’s Michel Petite lobbied on the EU Tobacco Products Directive.
• From 2009 to 2011 PR company Gardant Communications worked for Philip Morris UK. In 2009, the PR company supported Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban and was involved in Philip Morris’ Regulatory Litigation Action Plan Against the Display Ban.
• APCO Associates‘ collaboration with PMI goes back to the 1990s when it helped the company set up the European Science and Environment Forum. More recently, it was involved in Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban.
• London-based PR company INHouse Communications also played a part in Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban.
• Ogilvy Group‘s collaboration with Philip Morris goes back to the 1950s when it ran one of its advertising campaigns.
• José María Aznar, the former Spanish Prime Minister (see below)

Controversial Marketing Strategies

Since its controversial “Be Marlboro: Targeting the World’s Biggest Brand at Youth” campaign in 2014, PMI have been accused on multiple occasions of targeting their products at young people. On its website, PMI says that it is “committed to doing our part to help prevent children from smoking or using nicotine products”. ²¹⁹ It further states that its “marketing complies with all applicable laws and regulations, and we have robust internal policies and procedures in place so that all our marketing and advertising activities are directed only toward adult smokers”.²¹⁹ Despite these assurances, PMI has been accused of, and fined for, running marketing campaigns that target young people. For more information see Be Marlboro: Targeting the World’s Biggest Brand at Youth. PMI has increasingly used social media to market its newer products, including e-cigarettes (also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems, or ENDS) and heated tobacco products.

• For more information on PMI’s newer, including IQOS, visit Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International and Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International.

In December 2023 The Times newspaper highlighted PMI’s role in third party campaigns promoting e-cigarettes in the UK.²²⁰ For more information visit the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World page.

Complicity in Tobacco Smuggling

PMI portrays itself publicly as a victim of illicit tobacco trade, with the company reporting that tobacco smuggling results in “considerable financial losses” and “damage” to manufacturers’ brands.²²¹ To help tackle illicit trade, PMI launched a funding initiative called PMI IMPACT in 2016, worth US$100m and aimed at bringing together “organisations that fight illegal trade and related crimes, enabling them to implement solutions”.²²²²²³ In its first call for proposals in 2016, PMI asked for “projects that have an impact on illegal trade and related crimes in the European Union…”²²⁴ The second call, made in 2017, expanded the areas of focus to include the Middle East, North Africa, South and Central America and South and Southeast Asia.²²⁵ For more information, visit our page on PMI IMPACT. In contrast to the company’s public persona of being part of the smuggling solution, evidence shows that the company was, in fact, part of the problem. In 2000, the European Commission (backed by a majority of EU member states) started court proceedings in the US Courts against PMI and other tobacco companies for its complicity in tobacco smuggling. The Commission claimed that the tobacco companies “boosted their profits in the past by deliberately oversupplying some countries so that their product could be smuggled into the EU”, costing the EU millions of euros in lost tax and customs revenue.²²⁶²²⁷ PMI and the Commission settled their dispute in 2004, when the company agreed to pay the Commission £675m to fund anti-smuggling activities.²²⁸ The two Parties signed an Anti-Counterfeit and Anti-Contraband Cooperation Agreement,²²⁹ referred to by the company as Project Star. As part of this agreement, PMI commissioned KPMG to measure annually the size of the legal, contraband and counterfeit markets for tobacco products in each EU Member States. Project Star’s methodology and data have been strongly criticised for lack of transparency, overestimating illicit cigarette levels in some European countries, and serving PMI’s interests over those of the EU and its member states.²³⁰

Tactics to Subvert Tobacco Control Campaigns and Policies

PMI has strongly opposed tobacco control legislation and regulations across the world, including plain packaging in Australia and the UK, the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), and tobacco control decrees in Uruguay. The company has used a variety of strategies and tactics to influence tobacco control policies and subvert existing regulations.

Funding Pro-Tobacco Research and Discrediting Independent Evidence

In response to plain packaging proposals in the UK, PMI funded research, expert opinion and public relations activities which supported its position. One of the people that PMI funded for this purpose was Will O’Reilly, a former Detective Chief Inspector with the London Metropolitan Police. O’Reilly was appointed as a PMI consultant in 2011,²³¹ conducting undercover test purchases of illicit tobacco and publicising his findings in UK regional press.²³² One of PMI’s arguments to oppose plain packaging was that the public health measure would lead to an increase in illicit tobacco, including counterfeited plain packs. For background on, and a critique of, this argument, go to Countering Industry Arguments Against Plain Packaging: It will Lead to Increased Smuggling. O’Reilly’s test purchases appear to have enabled PMI to secure significant press coverage of its data on illicit tobacco.²³³ In March 2019, Euromonitor International, a market research organisation, received funding through two PMI initiatives: the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World and PMI IMPACT.^234235236 Examples of other organisations and individuals that have received funding from PMI to produce research or expert opinions or critiques of independent evidence, in order to oppose tobacco control legislation are: Deloitte | KPMG | Transcrime | Roy Morgan Research | Ashok Kaul | Michael Wolf | Populus | Centre for Economics and Business Research²³⁷²³⁸ | Compass Lexecon²³⁹ | Rupert Darwall²⁴⁰ | James Heckman²⁴¹ | Lord Hoffman²⁴² | Alfred Kuss²⁴³ | Lalive ²⁴⁴ | LECG^245246247 | London Economics | Povaddo²¹⁷| SKIM Consumer Research²⁴⁸

• To see a list of all organisations funded through PMI’s Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW), visit our pages on the FSFW’s Centres of Excellence and grantees.
• For more information on the tobacco industry’s use of research to undermine legitimate independent evidence see: Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Research, Expert Opinion and Public Relations.

Using Freedom of Information Requests to Acquire Public Health Research Data

Freedom of Information (FOI) requests are one strategy that the tobacco industry uses to undermine tobacco control legislation, often covertly using third parties.²⁴⁹ In 2009, and again in 2011, PMI sent Freedom of Information requests to Stirling University (UK) requesting access to a wide range of data from its research on teenage smoking. PMI alleged that it wanted “to understand more about the research project conducted by the University of Stirling on plain packaging for cigarettes”.²⁵⁰ The FOI requests were eventually dropped. For more information on these FOI requests, and an explanation on how these requests impacted the University of Stirling, go to our page FOI: Stirling University.

Fabricating Support through Front Groups

PMI has used front groups to oppose tobacco control measures. Front Groups are organisations that purport to serve a public interest, while actually serving the interests of another party (in this case the tobacco industry), and often obscuring the connection between them. In Australia, leaked private documents revealed that the supposed anti-plain packaging retailer grass roots movement, the Alliance of Australian Retailers was set up by tobacco companies and that the Director of Corporate Affairs Philip Morris Australia, Chris Argent, played a critical role in its day-to-day operations.^251252253

• For more information on this front group, and Philip Morris Australia’s involvement, visit the Alliance of Australian Retailers page.
• For more information on front groups funded and/or organised by PMI and other tobacco companies, see the list on the Expose Tobacco website.

Lobbying of Decision Makers

Article 5.3 of the The World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) explicitly aims to reduce industry influence in public health policymaking by obliging parties to protect their health policies from tobacco industry interests and interference.²⁵⁴ Yet tobacco industry representatives, and third-parties regularly attempt to influence public health policymaking in the industry’s favour. This section details some of these incidents involving PMI and the response of the governments and the global health community.

EU

PMI reported that it spent between €1,250,000 and €1,499,999 in 2019 lobbying EU institutions, employing only 2 fulltime equivalent staff in its Brussels office.²⁰⁷ If this data is correct, it suggests that PMI relied heavily on external lobbying firms. A 2013 leaked internal PMI document revealed that the company had 161 lobbyists working to undermine the revision of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD).²⁵⁵ The objective of PMI’s campaign was to either “push” (i.e. amend) or “delay” the TPD proposal, and “block” any so-called “extreme policy options” like the proposed point of sales display ban and plain packaging.²⁵⁶

• For more information on PMI’s campaign to undermine the TPD, go to EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision and PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers.

UK

The leaked internal PMI documents from 2013 also revealed the extent of a multi-faceted campaign against Plain Packaging in the UK, including a detailed media campaign using dozens of third parties (both individuals and organisations) to promote its arguments against the policy. The documents also included a detailed political analysis of potential routes of influence for the tobacco company (Image 1).²³¹

One third party appointed in November 2011 to help PMI oppose the plain packaging proposal was the Crosby Textor Group. This appointment led to a conflict of interest scandal, given that Lynton Crosby co-Director of the Crosby Textor Group, was also the political election strategist for the UK’s Conservative Party, which was in power in the UK. David Cameron, then Prime Minister, insisted that Crosby never lobbied him about plain packaging. ²⁵⁷²⁵⁸ Despite a lack of evidence that Crosby lobbied the Prime Minister and Health Minister on plain packaging, documents released under FOI legislation, obtained by the University of Bath Tobacco Control Research Group, show that Crosby lobbied the UK Government on plain packaging via Lord Marland, the then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Intellectual Property, to oppose plain packaging. For more information on this lobbying scandal, go to Lynton Crosby’s page.

• For more detail on PMI’s attempts to undermine plain packaging proposals in the UK, visit: PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers | PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Lobbying Campaign | PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Media Campaign | PMI’s “Illicit Trade” Anti-Plain Packaging Campaign
• For information on the tobacco industry’s tactics to undermine this tobacco control measures, visit our pages on: Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Company Opposition | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Research, Expert Opinion and Public Relations | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Built Alliances | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Third Party Campaigns
• PMI also opposed the tobacco product display ban gradually introduced in the UK from 2012. More information on PMI’s tactics to stop this measure, see: Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban

Australia

Australia has one of the least hospitable regulatory environments for the tobacco industry, having passed regulations banning advertising since 1976, a point of sale ban in 2011, and a plain packaging law in 2012. It also has regulation in place to prevent the sale of nicotine products, including e-cigarettes and HTPs.²⁵⁹

The industry has not, however, given up on attempting to market its products and lobby decision makers across the country. In a 2019 article, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that Tammy Chan, Managing Director of PMI Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific wrote letters to health organisations urging them to enter into a “dialogue” on PMI’s “smoke-free” vision in the lead up to a parliamentary select committee meeting on the impact of e-cigarettes on “personal choice”.²⁶⁰

In March 2019, PMI was accused of “subliminal advertising” in its sponsorship of the Ferrari Formula One team during the Australian Gran Prix in Melbourne. PMI has been accused of attempting to evade advertising bans by sponsoring motorsports teams.

• For more information see Motorsport Sponsorship

Latin America

José María Aznar, the former Prime Minister of Spain, has been widely reported by media outlets as having taken up a position as a lobbyist for PMI in Latin America.^261262263264

• For more information on his meetings with public officials in Chile and Peru, as well as his history of association with the tobacco industry while in office, see our page on José María Aznar.

Intimidating Governments with Litigation or Threat of Litigation

PMI has legally challenged tobacco control regulations across the globe, including:

• Comprehensive No Smoking Ordinance (2010 and 2016) and Tobacco-Free Generation Ordinance (2016) in Balanga, Philippines. A front group for the world’s biggest tobacco companies, including PMI, called the Philippine Tobacco institute (PTI) sued the city of Balanga in August 2017 over the Comprehensive No Smoking Ordinance, which it argued was “arbitrary and oppressive” and cost PMI USD$420,000 a month in lost sales. In July 2018, regional courts ruled in PTI’s favour, noting that although the city’s tobacco control efforts were “commendable”, they were also unconstitutional. PTI launched another lawsuit in May 2018 to challenge the constitutionality of the city’s Tobacco-Free Generation Ordinance.²⁶⁰
• The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labelling) Second Amendment Rules, 2018 text and pictorial health warnings law in India. PMI affiliate Godfrey Phillips India sought a stay of implementation of new legislation requiring health warnings to increase to cover 85% of the surface of cigarette packaging, from the High Court of Karnataka in Bangalore, India. The Court rejected the request for stay in August 2018. The legality of the Rules themselves was at the time pending in the Supreme Court.²⁶⁶
• The May 20, 2016 Decree plain packaging law in France. In December 2016, the Conseil d’Etat (the Council of State, the highest administrative jurisdiction in France) dismissed a six-part legal challenge jointly brought against the plain packaging law by JTI, Philip Morris France, BAT France, a tobacco paper manufacturer and The National Confederation of Tobacco Retailers of France (Confédération Nationale des Buralistes de France).²⁶⁷
• In 2013, the mayor of Popayán, a city in southwestern Colombia, issued a decree prohibiting tobacco sales within 500 metres of schools, libraries and health institutions. Following heavy lobbying from Coltabaco, a Philip Morris affiliate, the radius was decreased to 200 metres. Coltabaco sued Popayán in March 2015, arguing that a mayoral decree was insufficient to effect legitimate regulation. Coltabaco won its lawsuit in September 2015.²⁶⁸
• The Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015 (UK). Following the passage of the legislation in March 2015, PMI and others launched a legal action, which it lost in May 2016 (the day before the legislation was due to come into force).²⁶⁹²⁷⁰
• The 2014 EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). PMI and BAT attempted to invalidate the TPD as a whole, or various provisions within it, but this legal challenge was dismissed in the European Court of Justice in May 2016.²⁷¹ More details can be found on the page TPD: Legal Challenges.
• The Ministry of Public Health Notice of Rules, Procedures, and Conditions for the Display of Images, Warning Statements, and Contact Channels for Smoking Cessation on Cigarette Labels of 2013 (Thailand). In July 2013, Philip Morris Thailand and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) Thailand requested a temporary injunction against an increase of picture and text health warnings from 55 to 85 percent of the front and back of cigarette warnings. Though their request was initially granted in August 2013 in the Central Administrative Court of Thailand, the injunction was reversed in May 2014 by the Supreme Administrative Court following appeal by the government. PMI and JTI ultimately withdrew their legal challenge.²⁷²
• Following heavy criticism of its “Be Marboro” campaign worldwide (see below), Germany banned PMI from displaying “Be Marlboro” advertising in the country. A German court overturned the ban in 2015, stating that the wording of the advertisements did not explicitly target younger than legal age smokers.²⁷³
• National Systems of Health Oversight RDC No. 14/2012 Brazil. The Brazil Health Regulatory Agency’s (ANVISA) resolution No. 14 banned tobacco additives and flavours. The National Confederation of Industry (Confederação Nacional da Indústria) challenged the ban as an unconstitutional use of regulatory power. In February 2018, the highest court in Brazil, the Supreme Federal Tribunal, upheld the 2012 ban and reaffirmed the right of ANVISA to regulate tobacco products.²⁷⁴
• The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 (Australia). PMI fiercely opposed the legislation, fearing that it might set a global precedent. The company fought this legislation unsuccessfully on three fronts:
  • World Trade Organization (WTO) challenge: In 2014, PMI supported a request by the Dominican Republic government before the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, alleging that Australia’s plain packaging laws breach the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).²⁷⁵ Similar requests were submitted by Ukraine, Cuba, Indonesia and Honduras, and furthermore, a record number of more than 40 WTO members joined the dispute as third parties.²⁷⁶
  • Constitutional challenge: In March 2012, PMI supported a claim made by British American Tobacco (BAT) in December 2011 before the Australian High Court that plain packaging was in breach of the Australian constitution.²⁷⁷ On 15 August 2012, the Hight Court ruled that plain packaging was not in breach with the Australian constitution as there had been no acquisition of property as alleged by the tobacco companies.²⁷⁶
  • Bilateral Investment challenge: In 2011, PMI started legal proceedings against the Australian government for allegedly violating the terms of The Australia – Hong Kong Bilateral Investment Treaty.²⁷⁸ In December 2015, The Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a unanimous decision that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. For more information on all three claims go to Australia: Challenging Legislation.
• Executive Decree No. 611 passed on 3 June 2010 in Panamá. Philip Morris Panamá joined onto a claim of unconstitutionality brought by British American Tobacco (BAT) against a ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) and tobacco product display at the point of sale. BAT Panama claimed the ban violated freedom of expression and property rights, among others. The Supreme Court ruled in May 2014 against BAT, noting that, among other things, freedom of expression could be restricted in order to protect public health.²⁷⁹
• 2010 Amendment to the 1973 Act relating to the Prevention of the Harmful Effects of Tobacco (the Tobacco Control Act) in Norway. The Norwegian display ban on tobacco products came into effect on 1 January 2010 after an amendment was passed by the government in favour of the prohibition of visible tobacco products, smoking accessories and vending machines of tobacco products. PMI unsuccessfully challenged the ban as imposing a barrier to trade; the Oslo District court ruled in favour of the display ban in September 2012.²⁸⁰
• Ordinance 514, dated 18 August 2008, and Decree 287/009 dated 15 June 2009 (Uruguay). PMI unsuccessfully challenged the Uruguayan Tobacco Control Act which included a mandate for 80% health warnings on tobacco packets. The case was decided in favour of public health in 2017.²⁸¹ PMI brought its claim under the Switzerland-Uruguay Bilateral Investment Treaty at the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes. The tribunal ruled in favour of Uruguay in July 2016.²⁸²

Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products

As the harms from conventional products have become better understood, and tobacco control measures have been put in place, the cigarette market – from which tobacco companies make most of their profits – has started to shrink. To secure the industry’s longer-term future, transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) have invested in, developed and marketed various newer nicotine and tobacco products.²⁸³  

In January 2017, PMI issued a press release which stated that the company intended to move its business away from conventional tobacco products entirely (see Image 2).²⁸⁴ The company’s much publicised vision for a “smoke-free” future is one in which PMI plays a central role in “[providing] better alternatives to smoking for those who don’t quit”.¹⁹⁸ Integral to this vision was the release of IQOS in 2014. By 2016, PMI was the market leader in heated tobacco products (HTPs), accounting for over 99% of the global HTP market.²⁶⁵ By 2018, PMI’s share of the global HTP market had fallen to around 80%.²⁶⁵²⁸⁵ PMI reported that by the end of 2019, IQOS was available in 52 markets, including the United States (US), and a number of lower income countries.²⁸⁶

• For more information on IQOS and PMI’s newer products see Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International and Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International.
• See also PMI’s Promotion of IQOS Using the FDA’s 2020 Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) Order

In April 2019, a life insurance company Reviti was launched. Registered in the UK at Companies House, Reviti is a wholly owned subsidiary of PMI.²⁸⁷²⁸⁸ The London-based company specialises in offering policies to smokers, with discounts for those who reduce or switch to PMI’s newer products.²⁸⁹

In May 2022, PMI made an offer of US$16 billion deal to acquire Swedish Match, a manufacturer of snus and nicotine pouches, as well as chewing tobacco, snuff and cigars.²⁹⁰²⁹¹ Swedish Match had planned to sell its cigar business but these plans were put on hold in March 2022.²⁹² PMI CEO Jacek Olczak said of the deal: “An important aspect of this proposed combination is the opportunity in the U.S., which is the world’s largest market for smoke-free products.”²⁹³PMI is also hoping to significantly increase its market share of newer nicotine products in Europe and Asia.²⁹⁴ 

As of 28 November 2022, PMI had acquired over 90% of Swedish Match, gaining control of the company and enabling it to buy the remaining shares and take Swedish Match off the stock market.²⁹⁵²⁹⁶

• For details see Swedish Match

Tobacco companies, including PMI, also invest in therapeutic products, such as nicotine lozenges, gum and inhalers. More information can be found on this page: Tobacco Company Investments in Pharmaceutical & NRT Products

“Smoke-Free” Campaigns

PMI has run various “smoke-free” campaigns promoting its newer products, including “Hold My Light” (UK); “Unsmoke Your World” (global); “It’s Time” (targeting policy makers); and “Futuro sin Humo” (in Mexico).

• For details see: Philip Morris International: “Smoke-Free” campaigns

Participation in Global Platforms to Rehabilitate Image

PMI has attempted to gain access to many high-level international events as a means of “rehabilitating its image and securing influence over global institutions and policy elites”. Since January 2019, PMI presence has been documented at:²⁶⁵

January 2019

• World Economic Forum (WEF; Davos, Switzerland): PMI launched its first “white paper” to coincide with WEF. Though it was not an invited guest, PMI held a side-event co-hosted by the Wall Street Journal, and sponsored the Davos Playbook, Politico’s daily newsletter distributed to attendees.

June 2019

• (Group of 20) G20 Summit (Osaka, Japan): PMI took out a two-page advertisement in The Japan Times promoting its corporate transformation and reiterating the need for dialogue between decision-makers and industry.
• Cannes Lions International Film Festival of Creativity (Cannes, France): PMI attended Cannes to talk about newer tobacco products and potentially recruit celebrity activists to its cause.²⁹⁷ In addition, PMI had its own schedule of events, hosted by actress Rose McGowan and rapper Wycliff Jean. It also spoke in the festival’s Good Track stream alongside organisations including Greenpeace and UN Women. The decision to include PMI on the Good Track was heavily criticised in the light of “the ethics of proclaiming a smoke-free philosophy while continuing to sell billions of cigarettes a year”.²⁹⁸²⁹⁹

October 2019

• United Nations General Assembly (UNGA; New York City, USA): Though barred from participating directly in the UNGA, PMI hosted a parallel event at Concordia, a high-level event to foster partnerships between businesses, governments and UN agencies. In attendance were officials from the UN’s World Food Program, the UN Foundation and the World Bank as well as PMI’s Vice President of Global Partnerships and Cooperation, who spoke at the event. Bob Eccles, a paid PMI advisor, spoke at the UNGA during a side event on Exclusion and Engagement in Sustainable Investing.

TobaccoTactics Resources

• PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers
• PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Lobbying Campaign
• PMI’s Anti-PP Media Campaign
• PMI’s “Illicit Trade” Anti-Plain Packaging Campaign
• PMI IMPACT
• Philip Morris vs the Government of Uruguay
• Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban
• Philip Morris’ Regulatory Litigation Action Plan Against the Display Ban
• Philip Morris’ Marlboro Brand Architecture
• Codentify
• Motorsport Sponsorship
• Digital Coding & Tracking Association (DCTA)
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: How it Frames Itself for a detailed analysis of the ways in which the Foundation portrays itself and those who oppose the Foundation, plus the counter evidence to these portrayals
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World People
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Grantees
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Centres of Excellence
• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International
• Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International

Relevant Links

• Read the STOP report: Addiction At Any Cost: The Truth About Philip Morris International
• Philip Morris International company website
• Cancer Council Australia’s Critiques of KPMG Australia illicit tobacco trade reports
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World website
• PMI Impact website

TCRG Research

• The Philip Morris-funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: tax return sheds light on funding activities, T. Legg, S. Peeters, P. Chamberlain, A. Gilmore, The Lancet, 2019, 393(10190):2487-2488
• The revision of the 2014 European tobacco products directive: an analysis of the tobacco industry’s attempts to ‘break the health silo’, S. Peeters, H. Costa, D Stuckler, M. McKee, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 2016, 25(1):108-117
• ‘It will harm business and increase illicit trade’: an evaluation of the relevance, quality and transparency of evidence submitted by transnational tobacco companies to the UK consultation on standardised packaging 2012, K. Evans-Reeves, J. Hatchard, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 2015, 24(e2):e168-e177
• Illicit trade, tobacco industry-funded studies and policy influence in the EU and UK, G, Fooks, S. Peeters, K. Evans-Reeves, Tobacco Control, 2014, 23(1):81-83
• Transnational tobacco company interests in smokeless tobacco in Europe: Analysis of internal industry documents and contemporary industry materials, S. Peeters, A. Gilmore, PLoS Medicine, 2013, 10(9):1001506
• Towards a greater understanding of the illicit tobacco trade in Europe: a review of the PMI funded ‘Project Star’ report, A. Gilmore, A. Rowell, S. Gallus, A. Lugo, L. Joossens, M. Sims, 2013, Tobacco Control, doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051240

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to the Bath TCRG’s list of publications.

References

The post Philip Morris International appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Futuro sin Humo (Smoke-free Future in English) is a Philip Morris International initiative³⁰⁰ from its Mexico office to promote their line of Next Generation Products. The initiative was launched in 2018, along with the hashtag #futurosinhumo, which translates into “smoke-free future”. Its website describes it as a

“movement is to inform and give voice to smokers and their over-18 years old relatives who are interested in the non-combustion alternatives that are now available in many other countries. We are sure that smokeless products are a better choice for smokers and their introduction in Mexico must be preceded by a debate that includes all stakeholders and is based on scientific evidence.”³⁰¹

The initiative has a petition for adults to sign to promote the introduction of smoke-free alternatives to Mexico and gain access to more information about Next Generation Products. The website also provides a number of articles about smoking, nicotine and smoke-free alternatives.³⁰¹ Animal Politico, a Mexican news outlet that has been producing content for Philip Morris International since 2018, has developed the articles. The narrative seeks to frame the habit of smoking traditional cigarettes as a thing of the past and focus on the negative aspects of the smoke rather than tobacco use.

Sports events advertising

The initiative was launched in the Mexican Formula 1 Grand Prix on 28 October 2018, where Futuro sin Humo was one of the main sponsors of the event. During this event the slogan was translated into English. ³⁰². Numerous influencers and celebrities were invited to participate in the F1 launch of Futuro sin Humo and Paddlock Club passes, which allow guests to gain VIP access to the event, were sponsored by the campaign. Furthermore, the F1 Ferrari Scuderia team was wearing the Mission Winnow logo during in the Mexican Grand Prix.
Mexico signed and ratified the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2004. This Convention clearly states under Article 13 that: “Any form of tobacco advertising, promotion or sponsorship should not be permitted in any country that is a Party to the WHO FCTC, under the obligations set out in the Convention, including tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship of motor sports events (…) and should cover all forms of tobacco, regardless of how the tobacco is consumed, including novel and emerging tobacco products”.³⁰³ The World Health Organization has urged governments to enforce existing bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, particularly in Motorsport Sponsorship. Following the promotion at the motor racing event, local and international non-governmental organizations filed a joint complaint against Phillip Morris Mexico, for breaching the General Law on Tobacco Control (2008) and the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.³⁰⁴ The complaint argues that the tobacco industry is promoting a product not yet legalized in the country and violating the ban of sports sponsorship. The Coalition, the Consejo Mexicano contra el Tabaquismo and Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids are the organisations behind the complaint. ³⁰⁵

Celebrities, influencers and social media marketing

Philip Morris Mexico has sponsored several social media influencers to post endorsements for the Futuro sin Humo campaign and e-cigarettes generally. Examples include the famous Mexican journalist Adela Micha, the popular YouTube comedian Chumel Torres, online health journalist Ethel Soriano, TV journalist Yuriria Sierra and the renowned Mexican actor and singer Leonardo de Lozanne.³⁰⁶
In March 2019, Philip Morris Mexico launched a contest under the hashtag #futurosinhumo, called Zona Libre de Humo (Smoke-free zone in English) on the Capptu platform for amateur photographers. The ad for the contest read: “Exemplify the benefits of the non-combustion tobacco product category! When heating tobacco instead of burning it, smoke does not occur. This means less odour in your home and car, and less discomfort for your pet and your partner. Now you can help Philip Morris Mexico illustrate this benefit!”³⁰⁷. Participants submit their photos, describe what smoke-free world means for them and have a chance at winning the prize equivalent in Mexican pesos to nearly £500. Winners and participants get their pictures published as part of the Futuro sin Humo campaign. Participants had to use the hashtag #futurosinhumo and #calientaeltabaconoloquemes on social media platforms. This last hashtag has been recently introduced along with #CalientaNoQuemes, to promote heated tobacco products in other countries.³⁰⁷
The social media campaign of Futuro Sin Humo in Mexico is very similar to others identified in a report by Reuters in May 2019 exposing Philip Morris International’s youth-oriented marketing. This report described an “aggressive marketing strategy rolled out across dozens of countries. From March 2018 to March 2019, social media posts using the hashtag #iqos have been viewed 179 million times on Instagram and Twitter (according to Keyhole, a social media analytics tool)”.³⁰⁸

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Motorsport Sponsorship
• Philip Morris

References

The post Futuro Sin Humo appeared first on TobaccoTactics.