European Parliament survey reveals widespread misconceptions about risk
A recent survey by the well renowned market-analysis platform TobaccoIntelligence paints a concerning picture of how Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) perceive modern nicotine products, including nicotine pouches. According to the report, a substantial share of MEPs still equate novel nicotine products with cigarettes or remain uncertain about their relative risks. Even though it is encouraging that a majority of respondents identified nicotine pouches as the lowest risk category, other results indicate a persistent lack of understanding of what should be considered baseline, fundamental facts in the regulation of nicotine products.
While MEPs cannot be expected to have expert knowledge on every topic, it is clear that a significant proportion of them have missed a crucial point: The vast majority of the risk from smoking comes from chemicals that are formed through the incomplete combustion of tobacco, including tar and carbon monoxide.
This becomes evident as when asked about the statement “Nicotine is just as harmful as tobacco”, responses were almost evenly split. Thirty-two percent of MEPs agreed to the statement, while another 20 percent chose a neutral option or had no opinion, meaning that more than half of respondents failed to reject the false claim outright.
This should not be a contested fact. For example, the World Health Organization clearly states:
“While nicotine is the addictive substance in tobacco, the majority of the harms associated with tobacco use are caused by other toxic chemicals present in tobacco smoke.”
(WHO, “Tobacco: key facts”, updated 2023)
Nicotine-use simply cannot be compared to the use of combusted tobacco, either in its chemistry or in its risk profile. If fewer than half of respondents recognize this basic fact, it is difficult to see how the European Parliament can reach evidence-based conclusions on the relative harm of alternatives such as nicotine pouches.
The knowledge gap may partly reflect the lack of clear and consistent information available to policymakers. Scientific understanding of nicotine pouches has developed quickly, while public debate has often blurred the line between combusted tobacco, vaping and smoke-free alternatives. This underlines the importance of transparent and balanced communication from both regulators and the scientific community.
Knowledge correlates with risk awareness
The survey further shows that MEPs who reported greater familiarity with these products were more likely to acknowledge harm reduction potential, suggesting that knowledge strongly correlates with awareness of relative risk.
This misalignment between science and perception matters. Regulation built on the assumption that all nicotine products are equally harmful risks limiting, delaying or even prohibiting adult smokers from switching to substantially lower risk alternatives.
Scientific reviews, including those by leading toxicologists and national public health authorities, consistently find that nicotine pouches present only a fraction of the risk associated with smoking. They are not heated, burnt, ingested or inhaled. They do not cause cancer, lung disease or cardiovascular disease and represent a fundamentally different risk profile from smoking.
Policy consequences
Misconceptions about relative risk are not just theoretical. They risk shaping future legislation under TPD3 and the European Beating Cancer Plan. Without a clear understanding of product differences, the EU could end up regulating low-risk alternatives more strictly than combustible tobacco, undermining its own harm reduction goals.
Closing this knowledge gap will require structured dialogue between policymakers, scientists and public-health experts. Regular briefings and transparent data on the risk continuum would help ensure that future regulation supports, rather than discourages, adult smokers from moving away from combustible products.
A reminder of what’s at stake
The lack of a shared understanding is already visible across Europe. Some member states have chosen proportionate and transparent regulatory frameworks that recognize the harm reduction potential of nicotine pouches, while others have opted for highly restrictive or even prohibitive approaches that, whether through inadvertent policy design or insufficient consideration of real-world behavioral dynamics, risk protecting cigarettes instead. These differences highlight the urgent need for a coherent, science-based approach at EU level.
As the EU moves closer to revising its Tobacco Products Directive (TPD3), understanding these distinctions is crucial. A regulatory framework that ignores relative risk will not only limit harm reduction potential but could entrench the most dangerous products at the expense of innovation and public health.
There is, quite simply, a lot of work left to do to ensure that lawmakers’ views reflect scientific consensus. Until policymakers recognize that nicotine pouches are a replacement, not a rebranding of smoking, Europe will fall short of its stated ambition to reduce tobacco-related disease.
About the survey
The TobaccoIntelligence survey was conducted in early 2025 and sent to all Members of the European Parliament, covering every member state and political group. Responses were submitted online and anonymously. In total, 32 MEPs participated, representing just over 4 percent of the Parliament. This makes the results indicative rather than statistically representative, yet the report provides an important insight into the level of understanding of this specific topic among the responding lawmakers in the European Parliament.