Brownstone Institute
Blessed Are the Cigarette Makers in UN’s World of Woke
From the Brownstone Institute
BY
All businesses may eventually be required to follow the UN’s Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) standards. These are intended to measure the contribution of businesses to environmental and social issues, as well as whether their operations fulfil the requirement of equality for all minority groups, real or imaginary.
In Europe, under the new EU Taxonomy, companies are forced to submit complex and detailed ‘sustainability’ reports. The requirements apply not only to the companies; they also have to ensure that their suppliers meet them. Initially, these reporting requirements will only apply to medium to larger firms, but it won’t be long before smaller businesses and even the self-employed will have to comply as well. As the ‘conspiracy theorists’ have it, our homes will be next.
The implementation of ESG standards is a lucrative opportunity for consulting firms specializing in advising executives and company owners on how to best to comply, or pretend to comply, with the standards, gathering data, and writing thick reports, often published on glossy paper and shelved unread until they end up in landfills.
Recently it was reported that Tesla, one of those at the forefront of the transition to green energy, scored only 37 out of 100 points in S&P Global’s assessment of its performance in the aforementioned categories. It seems to weigh heavily against the company that it is mostly controlled by white males, and its executives have not spent much time or resources supporting various activist groups, or selecting suppliers based on their location in developing countries rather than the quality of their products.
As more and more investment funds demand that the companies they invest in meet the standards, and banks also make such requirements to an increasing extent, those who fail the test may face difficulties with financing.
However, cigarette maker Philip Morris won’t have to worry about this. It scored 84 out of 100 in the latest assessment of its contribution to improving the world. This performance is not based on the company’s products, which are the main cause of untimely deaths in the United States and cut short more lives than alcohol, drugs, and traffic accidents combined. The carbon footprint of the industry is significant, and its overall negative environmental impact looms large. Tobacco farming is mostly carried out in developing countries, causing deforestation and erosion.
But none of this matters when it comes to the ‘positive impact on society, sustainability, and equality’ as measured by ESG standards. The company claims it ‘empowers’ female tobacco farmers, fights against ‘systemic racism’ (conveniently forgetting that black Americans are proportionally most affected by smoking-related diseases), and emphasizes the importance of combating ‘microaggression’ and hiring from diverse backgrounds.
The ESG standards are a serious threat to the freedom of expression. To meet the requirements, companies must control ‘misinformation’ and ‘hate speech’ within their boundaries. Media outlets and social media companies that aim to meet the criteria must suppress discourse that does not align with the approved views of the authorities. The new action plan of the European Union against ‘misinformation’ is justified, among other things, by the ESG standards, but it implies that social and media platforms must silence opinions not favoured by the authorities.
In the early days of the corporate social responsibility movement, it mattered what the companies actually did. Tobacco companies were not popular among young MBA graduates at the turn of the century, and their interview invitations were usually turned down. Times change. Big tobacco, alcohol producers, and for that matter manufacturers of cluster bombs, poison gas, and torture devices now have nothing to worry about because ESG comes to their rescue. Instead of real social responsibility, glossy reports are now all that’s needed. The real impact of companies’ operations is of no importance, as long as the indulgence certificates are purchased at list price. Pretense is all that matters.
Republished from TCW
Brownstone Institute
Bizarre Decisions about Nicotine Pouches Lead to the Wrong Products on Shelves
From the Brownstone Institute
A walk through a dozen convenience stores in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, says a lot about how US nicotine policy actually works. Only about one in eight nicotine-pouch products for sale is legal. The rest are unauthorized—but they’re not all the same. Some are brightly branded, with uncertain ingredients, not approved by any Western regulator, and clearly aimed at impulse buyers. Others—like Sweden’s NOAT—are the opposite: muted, well-made, adult-oriented, and already approved for sale in Europe.
Yet in the United States, NOAT has been told to stop selling. In September 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued the company a warning letter for offering nicotine pouches without marketing authorization. That might make sense if the products were dangerous, but they appear to be among the safest on the market: mild flavors, low nicotine levels, and recyclable paper packaging. In Europe, regulators consider them acceptable. In America, they’re banned. The decision looks, at best, strange—and possibly arbitrary.
What the Market Shows
My October 2025 audit was straightforward. I visited twelve stores and recorded every distinct pouch product visible for sale at the counter. If the item matched one of the twenty ZYN products that the FDA authorized in January, it was counted as legal. Everything else was counted as illegal.
Two of the stores told me they had recently received FDA letters and had already removed most illegal stock. The other ten stores were still dominated by unauthorized products—more than 93 percent of what was on display. Across all twelve locations, about 12 percent of products were legal ZYN, and about 88 percent were not.
The illegal share wasn’t uniform. Many of the unauthorized products were clearly high-nicotine imports with flashy names like Loop, Velo, and Zimo. These products may be fine, but some are probably high in contaminants, and a few often with very high nicotine levels. Others were subdued, plainly meant for adult users. NOAT was a good example of that second group: simple packaging, oat-based filler, restrained flavoring, and branding that makes no effort to look “cool.” It’s the kind of product any regulator serious about harm reduction would welcome.
Enforcement Works
To the FDA’s credit, enforcement does make a difference. The two stores that received official letters quickly pulled their illegal stock. That mirrors the agency’s broader efforts this year: new import alerts to detain unauthorized tobacco products at the border (see also Import Alert 98-06), and hundreds of warning letters to retailers, importers, and distributors.
But effective enforcement can’t solve a supply problem. The list of legal nicotine-pouch products is still extremely short—only a narrow range of ZYN items. Adults who want more variety, or stores that want to meet that demand, inevitably turn to gray-market suppliers. The more limited the legal catalog, the more the illegal market thrives.
Why the NOAT Decision Appears Bizarre
The FDA’s own actions make the situation hard to explain. In January 2025, it authorized twenty ZYN products after finding that they contained far fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes and could help adult smokers switch. That was progress. But nine months later, the FDA has approved nothing else—while sending a warning letter to NOAT, arguably the least youth-oriented pouch line in the world.
The outcome is bad for legal sellers and public health. ZYN is legal; a handful of clearly risky, high-nicotine imports continue to circulate; and a mild, adult-market brand that meets European safety and labeling rules is banned. Officially, NOAT’s problem is procedural—it lacks a marketing order. But in practical terms, the FDA is punishing the very design choices it claims to value: simplicity, low appeal to minors, and clean ingredients.
This approach also ignores the differences in actual risk. Studies consistently show that nicotine pouches have far fewer toxins than cigarettes and far less variability than many vapes. The biggest pouch concerns are uneven nicotine levels and occasional traces of tobacco-specific nitrosamines, depending on manufacturing quality. The serious contamination issues—heavy metals and inconsistent dosage—belong mostly to disposable vapes, particularly the flood of unregulated imports from China. Treating all “unauthorized” products as equally bad blurs those distinctions and undermines proportional enforcement.
A Better Balance: Enforce Upstream, Widen the Legal Path
My small Montgomery County survey suggests a simple formula for improvement.
First, keep enforcement targeted and focused on suppliers, not just clerks. Warning letters clearly change behavior at the store level, but the biggest impact will come from auditing distributors and importers, and stopping bad shipments before they reach retail shelves.
Second, make compliance easy. A single-page list of authorized nicotine-pouch products—currently the twenty approved ZYN items—should be posted in every store and attached to distributor invoices. Point-of-sale systems can block barcodes for anything not on the list, and retailers could affirm, once a year, that they stock only approved items.
Third, widen the legal lane. The FDA launched a pilot program in September 2025 to speed review of new pouch applications. That program should spell out exactly what evidence is needed—chemical data, toxicology, nicotine release rates, and behavioral studies—and make timely decisions. If products like NOAT meet those standards, they should be authorized quickly. Legal competition among adult-oriented brands will crowd out the sketchy imports far faster than enforcement alone.
The Bottom Line
Enforcement matters, and the data show it works—where it happens. But the legal market is too narrow to protect consumers or encourage innovation. The current regime leaves a few ZYN products as lonely legal islands in a sea of gray-market pouches that range from sensible to reckless.
The FDA’s treatment of NOAT stands out as a case study in inconsistency: a quiet, adult-focused brand approved in Europe yet effectively banned in the US, while flashier and riskier options continue to slip through. That’s not a public-health victory; it’s a missed opportunity.
If the goal is to help adult smokers move to lower-risk products while keeping youth use low, the path forward is clear: enforce smartly, make compliance easy, and give good products a fair shot. Right now, we’re doing the first part well—but failing at the second and third. It’s time to fix that.
Addictions
The War on Commonsense Nicotine Regulation
From the Brownstone Institute
Cigarettes kill nearly half a million Americans each year. Everyone knows it, including the Food and Drug Administration. Yet while the most lethal nicotine product remains on sale in every gas station, the FDA continues to block or delay far safer alternatives.
Nicotine pouches—small, smokeless packets tucked under the lip—deliver nicotine without burning tobacco. They eliminate the tar, carbon monoxide, and carcinogens that make cigarettes so deadly. The logic of harm reduction couldn’t be clearer: if smokers can get nicotine without smoke, millions of lives could be saved.
Sweden has already proven the point. Through widespread use of snus and nicotine pouches, the country has cut daily smoking to about 5 percent, the lowest rate in Europe. Lung-cancer deaths are less than half the continental average. This “Swedish Experience” shows that when adults are given safer options, they switch voluntarily—no prohibition required.
In the United States, however, the FDA’s tobacco division has turned this logic on its head. Since Congress gave it sweeping authority in 2009, the agency has demanded that every new product undergo a Premarket Tobacco Product Application, or PMTA, proving it is “appropriate for the protection of public health.” That sounds reasonable until you see how the process works.
Manufacturers must spend millions on speculative modeling about how their products might affect every segment of society—smokers, nonsmokers, youth, and future generations—before they can even reach the market. Unsurprisingly, almost all PMTAs have been denied or shelved. Reduced-risk products sit in limbo while Marlboros and Newports remain untouched.
Only this January did the agency relent slightly, authorizing 20 ZYN nicotine-pouch products made by Swedish Match, now owned by Philip Morris. The FDA admitted the obvious: “The data show that these specific products are appropriate for the protection of public health.” The toxic-chemical levels were far lower than in cigarettes, and adult smokers were more likely to switch than teens were to start.
The decision should have been a turning point. Instead, it exposed the double standard. Other pouch makers—especially smaller firms from Sweden and the US, such as NOAT—remain locked out of the legal market even when their products meet the same technical standards.
The FDA’s inaction has created a black market dominated by unregulated imports, many from China. According to my own research, roughly 85 percent of pouches now sold in convenience stores are technically illegal.
The agency claims that this heavy-handed approach protects kids. But youth pouch use in the US remains very low—about 1.5 percent of high-school students according to the latest National Youth Tobacco Survey—while nearly 30 million American adults still smoke. Denying safer products to millions of addicted adults because a tiny fraction of teens might experiment is the opposite of public-health logic.
There’s a better path. The FDA should base its decisions on science, not fear. If a product dramatically reduces exposure to harmful chemicals, meets strict packaging and marketing standards, and enforces Tobacco 21 age verification, it should be allowed on the market. Population-level effects can be monitored afterward through real-world data on switching and youth use. That’s how drug and vaccine regulation already works.
Sweden’s evidence shows the results of a pragmatic approach: a near-smoke-free society achieved through consumer choice, not coercion. The FDA’s own approval of ZYN proves that such products can meet its legal standard for protecting public health. The next step is consistency—apply the same rules to everyone.
Combustion, not nicotine, is the killer. Until the FDA acts on that simple truth, it will keep protecting the cigarette industry it was supposed to regulate.
-
Artificial Intelligence1 day agoAI Faces Energy Problem With Only One Solution, Oil and Gas
-
National1 day agoWatchdog Demands Answers as MP Chris d’Entremont Crosses Floor
-
Health1 day agoLack of adequate health care pushing Canadians toward assisted suicide
-
Media1 day agoBreaking News: the public actually expects journalists to determine the truth of statements they report
-
Business20 hours agoLiberal’s green spending putting Canada on a road to ruin
-
Artificial Intelligence1 day agoAI seems fairly impressed by Pierre Poilievre’s ability to communicate
-
Alberta1 day agoATA Collect $72 Million in Dues But Couldn’t Pay Striking Teachers a Dime
-
Business20 hours agoCarney doubles down on NET ZERO





