Saturday 21st June 2025
Keynote #3
What I Hear vs. What I Know: Battling Misinformation from the Newsroom to the Facebook Comment Section
Maria Papaioannoy-Duic, founder and spokesperson of Rights 4 Vapers, said, ‘What I’ve learned is when science doesn’t back tobacco control’s story, they don’t revise the policy, they rewrite the story, not with facts, but with fear, drama and deliberate misinformation. In the fight for access to safer nicotine products, the truth isn’t just ignored, it’s attacked, silenced and mocked. A health official makes a statement, a journalist runs with it, a politician amplifies it, and suddenly it’s viral. Meanwhile, we, consumers, advocates, we’re in our chat groups, we are sharing sources, correcting headlines and trying to hold the line with science, evidence and facts.’
‘The misinformation is institutional, not only in Canada, but around the world. Health agencies, regulators, even doctors, often repeat outdated or debunked information, sometimes out of fear, sometimes out of habit, and most times because they just don’t have the time to learn. And the thing is, tobacco control knows this, and they capitalise on it. No one wants to really defend nicotine, because it’s not sexy. But this isn’t about being liked, it’s about eradicating smoking, and that means telling the truth even when it’s uncomfortable.’
‘In 2022, the Canadian Tobacco and Nicotine Survey broke down the numbers on relative risk and beliefs among Canadians and found that 81% of Canadians either misunderstood or had no idea that vaping is safer than smoking. And when we look at people who smoke, 79% didn’t know that vaping is safer, and among those who smoke but have never tried a vaping product, a staggering 90% believed vaping is as bad or worse. These are the very people who stand to benefit the most from switching to safer alternatives, yet misinformation has left them stuck, misled, confused and still smoking. They truly believe, because of where they go to get their information, that smoking that cigarette will keep them alive longer and healthier than switching to a vape.’
‘My 2009 self would never believe what is happening in 2025. Millions of us who quit smoking with safer alternatives are now being told we’re wrong. Instead of tobacco companies being the villains, it’s us, people who use safer nicotine products and speak up and out about it, we are cast as the threats. Globally, governments are pushing their citizens to break the laws just to access a vape or pouch because the alternative to them is going back to smoking.’
‘When it comes to policy, science should take the lead, but in this space, emotion seems to win. Panic spreads faster than peer-reviewed studies. Tobacco Control is a well-oiled and frankly spoiled machine. It has no hesitation to reframe the narrative, to make anyone that goes against them the enemy, including folks who speak up for safer nicotine products. To them, we’re the enemy, because we’re telling the world nicotine isn’t the problem, combustion is.’
‘So, what do we do? We continue to push back with facts, with strategy and with heart, and most importantly, with action, from rallies to letters, from bus tours to social media, from simple pop ups to emails, we find a way to tell our story. When you show up calmly with credible information and lived experience, that’s when cracks start to form.’
‘When voices come together, when harm reduction meets medicine, meets policy, meets lived experience, that’s when we get traction. So, whether you’re an advocate, a policy maker, a health professional, someone trying to make a difference in your own circle, facts matter. Continue to share them, because lives depend on them.’
‘We are the public health heroes. We’re the ones that have to push the narrative and we’re the ones that have to keep moving forward.’
Konstantinos Farsalinos, a physician at the Universities of Patras and West Attica in Greece, said, ‘In 2021, a study of more than 1,000 US physicians said that 83% strongly agreed with the statement nicotine causes cardiovascular disease, and 80.5% strongly agreed with the statement that nicotine causes cancer. You understand that this level of misinformation and misperception is not only widely present in society and among non-experts, but also among experts. And experts have been the source of information for consumers.’
‘I think that we have underused social media. When I say we, I mean the supporters of tobacco harm reduction and, even more so, those who have been involved in research. We haven’t made any consistent effort to educate consumers. We have been doing it sporadically and we have lacked consistency.’
Panel Discussion #5
Who else should be in the room?
Garrett McGovern, medical director of the Priority Medical Clinic in Dublin, said, ‘A patient of mine had COPD and had to get a pneumonectomy and was on all sorts of treatments. But she could never really stop smoking 30-40 cigarettes a day. After a follow up with her respiratory specialist I asked whether the subject of electronic cigarettes had come up? They said that the respirologist when asked about electronic cigarettes, he recoiled and said, under no circumstances, take electronic cigarettes or try them and if you do, you’re no better off than smoking. This is a somebody who is very, very versed and experienced in lung health and the damages of smoking. How could anybody give that misinformation to somebody who’d lost their lung, who has COPD, who’s a heavy smoker?’
Adriana Curado, community researcher at the Grupo de Ativistas em Tratamentos (GAT) in Lisbon, said, ‘We tried to reach out to some senior top officials in the Ministry of Health to talk about this, and they were just suspicious. And the reason is that they are thinking that they might be contaminated by this industry plot. And I think we also have a problem with health professionals often spreading misinformation.’
Sharifa Ezat Wan Puteh, chair of the Malaysia Society for Harm Reduction, said, ‘We can raise awareness in the community. We can train frontline staff in tobacco harm reduction. But if we don’t have the safer nicotine products available, and if we are not able to give them for free to people who use drugs, to people who are living in the streets, to people who are facing very tough conditions in their lives. We are not achieving the change we need to achieve.’
Jessica Harding, director, Global Forum on Nicotine Limited, said, ‘We do try very hard to encourage people in other areas to come to GFN. I think the biggest barrier to this is the toxicity of this debate. To be honest, some people fear that they will suffer reputational damage if they come here to talk about consumer products that are unfortunately associated with an industry that (deservedly) has a bad reputation for what they have done in the past.’
Carolyn Beaumont, an Australian GP specialising in rural medicine, and founder of SmokerHealth national telehealth clinic, said, ‘I’ve had a significant number of patients referred to me from their psychiatrist, because they want them to continue nicotine, and stop smoking, but they don’t know where to start. They don’t know what product to recommend or how to prescribe it. So, psychiatrists are a very important and a receptive group to involve.’
Panel Discussion #6
Media, misinformation and public health
Will Godfrey, founder & editor-in-chief of Filter magazine, said, ‘The majority of tobacco harm reduction coverage, as we know, is awful and harmful. I would posit that while there are some people who know exactly what they’re doing and are very, very cynical about it and are spreading disinformation rather than misinformation, I think that the majority of the bad media coverage we’re talking about is simply regurgitated. It’s based on ignorance, on credulity towards public health institutions that should be trustworthy, towards, in some cases, prestigious academic organisations and flawed and often unpublished studies.’
‘When you consider that very few journalists are tobacco harm reduction beat journalists, they’re expected to cover multiple subjects quickly, which doesn’t lend itself to depth. In some cases, they’re churning out four or five stories a day, so seeing them trust what some academics tell them, or what the World Health Organization says, is sad and disappointing, but not that surprising.’
‘People are inspired by human stories. Most people don’t read studies and aren’t very interested in data. I do think that so many consumer stories are so incredibly inspiring, they’re also quite easy for journalists to write, compared to more deeply reported or data driven stories. It’s always vital that our messaging is underpinned by evidence and data, but aiming on a human level is one way that you can get clicks from a positive story.’
‘Harm reduction as a concept, as a movement, has always been a bottom-up phenomenon, and that’s why consumer voices are so important. I think building the intersections with other movements, where there are obvious alliances, is not only a good thing for this movement, but also for a way of telling stories in journalism that can appeal to different constituencies. For example, mental health, when we know that smoking rates are extremely high in that population, or homelessness and also broader drug policy reform and harm reduction, which is why it’s so great to see increasing numbers of people from a drug harm reduction background engaging in this area.’
David Zaruk, a risk-communication expert from Brussels, said, ‘Most other industries are facing the same problems, but I think one of the things I’d like to look at instead is the money. That’s where the narratives get control. That’s where the narratives that weave the stories that the media pick up. That costs a lot of money. As a lobbyist for the chemical industry for about 17 years, I knew enough that if you didn’t have the money, then your campaign is lost. And I’ve also seen your budgets for advocacy, and it’s not a good foretelling of the type of challenges you’re going to have.’
‘When you look at a lot of NGO campaigns and you wonder, how is it possible that they’re able to get these studies done? How is it possible to get the media to report on this? How is it possible to get the academics to talk about it? How is it possible to get the regulators to talk about all these things when all of it is false? Follow the money.’
Fiona Patten, a politician and activist from Australia, said, ‘I know a lot of the journalists who write these stories [containing misinformation], and they’re not bad people, but when I talk to them about these articles, they say they’re too scared to print anything else. Really knowledgeable health reporters are frightened of our Cancer Council, they are frightened of our Health Ministry. They are frightened that if they contradict the health department, if they contradict the cancer councils, then a great wrath will come upon them. Even for the political reporters who are reporting on this, if they contradict the minister, if they try to correct or ask difficult questions of the minister, they are no longer invited to have interviews with the minister. So, it is really difficult for journalists. I have some sympathy for them, and I think this is part of maintaining those relationships.’
‘In Australia we’ve seen the health minister congratulating himself on how successful our “world-leading programme” has been, with articles saying they’ve seized eight million illicit vapes, and that this proves that it’s working. In an article they interviewed a pharmacist who said he had sold one vape in a month. Then when you drilled down into the numbers, it was found that for every one legal vape that is supplied in Australia, 1,700 are supplied illicitly. Very successful, wouldn’t you say?’
Lynne Dawkins, director of Dawkins Analytics Ltd, said, ‘We’ve seen throughout this conference so many examples of misinformation. It’s everywhere. So, does this matter for public health? There have been numerous academic studies now that have shown that misperceptions are associated with a reduction in the trying of reduced risk products and reduced switching rates. But even worse than that, we’re now seeing evidence of people actually switching from vaping to smoking because they think that smoking is less harmful. So yes, I’d argue it really does matter for public health. If you are promoting information about the dangers of vaping, it leads to more smoking, more death and disease.’
‘Why is misinformation so common? Alarmist and negative stories generate interest, generate clicks. Humans are drawn to negative media stories much more than they are to positive ones. They’re more likely to be shared on social media. And of course, the media are very well aware of this, so you can’t blame them, in many ways, for feeding that information to the public, and of course, that will also be self-serving for them.’
‘During any involvement with the media, I think we need to bring the focus back to smoking. Smoking kills, and we know it.’
‘Academics need to build rapport with the media, but it’s also about telling stories. Brains are attuned to powerful, emotive stories.’
Closing Remarks
David Sweanor, adjunct professor, Faculty of Law, and chair of the Centre for Health Law, Policy & Ethics at the University of Ottawa, said, ‘I go to an awful lot of conferences. I like GFN more than any other, and the reason is that you get such a cross section of people and ideas. We have advocates here, but we also have consumers, researchers, scientists, entrepreneurs, business, and analysts. We have so many different ideas, and you keep getting challenged, and that’s helpful, because, you know the line that says, “respect those who seek the truth, be very suspicious of those who claim they’ve found it”. We’re dealing with an issue where a lot of people really think they’ve found the truth, and that’s why they don’t need to talk to anybody who has different views, or they vilify them.’
‘Two months ago, Goldman Sachs came out with a report following up on the very rapid decline of cigarette smoking in the United States and the uptake of alternatives. And Goldman Sachs says that alternative products, non-combustion products, are going to overtake the sales of cigarettes in the United States of America this year. That’s amazing, and it’s very much to the credit of those of you are sitting here, and others. We’re moving. Consumers are moving. It doesn’t matter what other people are saying, and we’re seeing this in country after country.’
‘We’re still talking about over a billion people on the planet smoking cigarettes, over eight million deaths a year. Projections of that number will be going up, not down. We have an awful lot to do. If we can speed this up, and we have the momentum, it’s unstoppable now. The question is, how fast can we move it ahead? And that’s what meetings like this help us accomplish.’
Watch the day’s proceedings here: