Facing evolving consumer preferences and stricter global regulations, tobacco giants are investing billions in “reduced-risk products,” leveraging scientific innovation as their survival strategy.
This strategic shift, however, occurs amid differing views from public health officials who question whether this is true progress or just the industry’s latest makeover.
Some health experts argue that this transition is less about reducing harm and more about safeguarding long-term profits as regulations tighten and cigarette sales fall. Japan Tobacco International (JTI), one of the largest tobacco companies, is investing heavily in heated tobacco systems like their flagship product, Ploom.
Globally, in labs and R&D centers from Tokyo to Richmond, the industry is undergoing a profound transformation — one framed as a public health initiative but driven by business needs.
The investment scale is remarkable. JTI’s parent, Japan Tobacco Group, plans to invest over 650 billion yen ($4.3 billion) in reduced-risk products from 2025 to 2027, more than doubling past investments. Yet, this doesn’t mean abandoning traditional products. JTI continues to invest in combustibles strategically, as shown by their $2.4 billion acquisition of Vector Group in 2024. Both product categories are expected to coexist, with combustibles remaining dominant beyond 2035.
Some industry leaders present these investments as proof of a commitment to a “smoke-free future.” However, public health experts warn this strategy follows a familiar pattern: create seemingly safer products, promote them via industry-backed science, lobby for lighter regulations, and attract new nicotine users — all while maintaining profits from addictive products.
The core of JTI’s strategy is the Ploom heated tobacco system, which Middle East General Manager Vitalija Kaneviciene describes as “the essence of JTI’s innovation journey — science-driven, consumer-focused, offering enhanced experiences, and committed to providing adult smokers credible, reduced-risk options.” She highlights how its “precision-heating technology” reflects years of research to “turn science into meaningful choices.”
Kaneviciene noted that market demand for innovation allows JTI to “listen, adapt, and evolve alongside consumers.” This is part of a broader plan to expand the Ploom system and achieve profitability in their reduced-risk business by 2028. Notably, JTI executives advocate for regulatory frameworks that “evolve with innovation.”
JTI is not alone in this pivot. Industry giants are repositioning as “harm reduction” champions. Philip Morris International now derives over 40% of revenue from smoke-free products like IQOS, while British American Tobacco’s “New Categories” make up nearly 18% of group revenue. The financial stakes are significant, with the US tobacco market expected to grow from $112.82 billion in 2024 to $180.48 billion by 2030, largely driven by alternative nicotine products.
Industry points to scientific evidence for this transformation. British American Tobacco’s research on oral nicotine pouches suggests a more than 99% reduction in exposure to harmful toxins compared to cigarette smoke. Companies often cite Sweden’s experience with snus — noting its lowest smoking rates in the EU at 5.4% and lowest tobacco-related cancer mortality. Established health authorities have also weighed in: the US FDA has granted Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) designations to certain new tobacco products, while the UK’s NHS includes vaping devices in its smoking cessation recommendations.
Yet some health authorities remain cautiously skeptical. The World Health Organization emphasizes quitting entirely as the best way to reduce tobacco harm and insists regulatory decisions “should be independent of the tobacco industry’s commercial interests.” This stance is based on the industry’s history of funding research to “create doubt about smoking harms.” Independent reviews have identified significant evidence gaps for these new products. A 2022 systematic review found clinical trials on heated tobacco products “insufficient to determine their public health benefits,” noting 29 of 40 trials had tobacco industry links.
Despite public health rhetoric, undeniable business realities persist. Global cigarette volumes are projected to decline by about 2% in 2025, fueling the need for diversification.
The industry’s future increasingly hinges on the success of reduced-risk platforms. As Kaneviciene notes, “Our goal is to balance progress and responsibility — driving innovation that benefits adult consumers, economies, and society.” Whether this balance serves public health interests, rather than creating new nicotine markets, is a crucial question at the intersection of business, science, and policy. The transformation is underway, but its ultimate impact on public health, industry profitability, and future nicotine consumers will only be revealed over time and through independent scientific scrutiny.
