The consumer is often the missing voice in global debates on tobacco harm reduction, with the discussion typically dominated by policymakers, academics, and advocacy groups. Few people who have quit smoking with either the help of safer nicotine alternatives or by abstaining completely are ever consulted. This is something a new initiative seeks to change by addressing actual lived experiences.
THR Global is a new platform that gathers and shares real stories about quitting smoking. People from all over the world have the opportunity to share how they moved away from traditional tobacco, whether by vaping, using nicotine pouches, heated tobacco, or other lower-risk products.
This is the simple gist of the platform — policy should be made with input from affected communities. Nicotine users have been treated for years as if they were passive objects rather than the subjects responsible for their own health. These decisions impact them directly, and yet, they are often left out of media stories and ignored in regulations. THR Global wants to fix this by collecting these voices and making them visible to lawmakers.
How it came about
Kurt Yeo, the creator of the platform, started the project after observing this gap for years. As a co-founder of the South African group Vaping Saved My Life, he witnessed how personal stories were often ignored in policy discussions “Personal testimonials have always existed, but they’ve been scattered across platforms and presented in ways that limit their broader impact,” Yeo told Vaping Post.
“What makes THR Global different is that we capture these lived experiences in a structured way, preserving the human story while extracting meaningful data. This allows individual journeys to be aggregated, compared, and measured, transforming personal accounts into a credible body of real-world evidence,” he added. On THR Global the stories are grouped by location and product type, creating a unique, user-driven resource that shows how harm reduction works in real life.
“Importantly, this structured approach transcends product categories and geographical regions, enabling insights to be viewed collectively rather than in isolation. By doing so, we broaden the conversation, moving beyond fragmented debates to a more inclusive, evidence-informed understanding of tobacco harm reduction.”
Authentic testimonials from real people
Real-life examples of course support the use of safer alternatives for smoking cessation. Sweden’s record of low smoking prevalence (below 5 percent), due to people using varieties of smokeless products, is regarded as a success for harm reduction. A strong testimony on THR Global came from Bengt Wiberg, the renowned inventor of Stingfree AB, who gave up smoking through snus following a traumatic experience in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War. His own transformation went on to drive lifelong activism — a reminder of how one individual can influence public health.
But it is not always made easy to switch to safer alternatives. Six positive testimonies come from Australia, where the preferred cessation products are vapes. Yet smokers face larger hurdles converting to vaping, as these products are hugely restricted and typically require a doctor’s prescription, which is not always easy to get. Research indicates restrictions on less harmful goods cause people to either go into an illegal market or continue smoking.
In the United Kingdom, the experience is markedly different. Public health authorities have supported vaping as a way to quit smoking, and as a result, smoking rates have dropped. One UK contributor to THR Global shares how they slowly switched from cigarettes to vaping after getting a persistent cough in their early forties. Earlier attempts to quit with willpower or by cutting down did not work. It was only after trying vaping, encouraged by a family member’s success, that they succeeded, the latter slowly replacing the former. There was trial and error in finding the right device and flavour—an often overlooked aspect of consumer behavior—but once the right combination was found, cigarettes were no longer needed. Within weeks, the chronic cough disappeared. More than a decade later, the individual remains smoke-free and has gradually reduced nicotine intake to minimal levels.
Consumers’ experiences should be prioritized in any debate
Very few clinical studies or policy reports provide details on what works, what doesn’t, and why. But this data could be used to write better, more human-centered rules. As experts in the field have argued, better tobacco control is pragmatic, where policies are judged by outcomes, not ideology.
Sadly, in most cases, evidence does not equal regulation. Cigarettes, the most dangerous delivery method for nicotine, are widely available in many places, while fewer harmful options are much more highly regulated. This regressive approach has been widely criticized by experts and is considered a significant roadblock to progress.
Platforms like THR Global help close this gap. By gathering and sharing consumer stories in an organized and easy-to-access way, they offer another kind of evidence, based on real experiences. These stories do not replace scientific data, but they add important context that is often missing.
These platforms also point to a bigger problem in public health. Decisions are often made without real input from the people most affected. Consumer advocacy groups, which usually have less funding and attention, find it hard to compete with larger organizations that influence the conversation. This can make policies feel out of touch with the people they are meant to help. And THR Global counters by making it even more difficult to dismiss what consumers have to say. It encourages sharing, supports transparency, and provides a forum for personal tales to educate us all. This reinforces a principle of harm reduction: to understand the accomplished as more than statistical data; they can indeed catalyze change.
Evidence of what actually works
As global smoking rates stop falling and old methods reach their limits, there is a growing need for new ideas in both products and policy. Harm reduction is not a perfect solution, but it aligns with how people actually behave. Real progress may depend on recognizing this and listening to those with firsthand experience.
In the end, the success of tobacco harm reduction will depend not only on science but also on whether policymakers are open to all types of evidence, including the stories of people who have actually quit.
