By the age of 21, Audu had already paid a heavy price for tobacco. What began as what he considered a cheap adventure eventually became one of the most expensive choices of his young life.
Audu is one of the many young Nigerians living on the fringes of Abuja. According to an account published by Premium Times in May 2026, his early exposure to tobacco contributed to respiratory complications that later developed into lung disease, disrupting his education and denying him the opportunity to fully enjoy the ordinary experiences of youth.
His story was cited by Dr Pavel Ursu, the World Health Organisation Country Representative in Nigeria, as a grim illustration of the consequences of early tobacco addiction.
There is something deeply disturbing about Audu’s experience. At 21, he should have been building his future, not serving as a warning about the dangers of addiction.
Yet his story also points to a much larger and increasingly complicated reality in Nigeria. The tobacco industry is no longer relying solely on the cigarette as its main product. Cigarettes, with their familiar smoke, ash and unmistakable smell, are increasingly sharing the market with products designed to appear cleaner, more sophisticated and more technologically advanced.
Vapes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches are becoming increasingly visible.
They come in attractive flavours, fit easily into pockets and, in some cases, resemble ordinary electronic gadgets. Some can be used without producing the visible smoke traditionally associated with cigarettes. Their marketing speaks of technology, lifestyle, freedom of choice and, perhaps most controversially, harm reduction.
But what happens when an industry whose profits depend on selling an addictive substance begins presenting itself as part of the solution to the health crisis associated with that substance?
That question lies at the heart of Nigeria’s evolving tobacco debate.
It is also why the controversy surrounding the proposed amendment to the National Tobacco Control Act should not be dismissed as merely another legislative disagreement. Beneath the debate lies a broader struggle over who gets to shape Nigeria’s nicotine market, how emerging products are regulated and whether the language of harm reduction is being used to protect public health or expand the tobacco industry’s reach.
The product is changing. So is the pitch.
In 2024, journalists with The Colonist Report Africa visited markets and major retail outlets in Port Harcourt and found nicotine containing disposable vapes openly displayed in shops and supermarkets. The investigation documented products reportedly containing two per cent and five per cent nicotine and selling for between about ₦1,000 and ₦18,000.
The investigation also found products imported from Europe, the United States, China, Canada and Dubai.
The significance was not merely that these products were available. It was that they were becoming normalised.
They were sitting openly on shelves alongside ordinary consumer products, making nicotine products increasingly accessible and familiar to young Nigerians. For a young person encountering them in a supermarket, nightlife venue or online space, the experience may look less like entering the tobacco market and more like purchasing an ordinary lifestyle product.
That normalisation is arguably one of the most significant changes in the country’s nicotine environment.
Manufacturers and retailers have increasingly promoted vaping as an alternative for smokers seeking to quit. But the World Health Organisation has warned that e cigarettes have not been proven effective for smoking cessation at the population level.
Meanwhile, health professionals continue to raise concerns about the consequences of nicotine use.
Professor Best Ordinoha of the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital has spoken about treating patients suffering health complications associated with vaping, including couples. He warned that nicotine affects the brain and heart and said vaping could produce both short term and long term health problems.
Among the short term effects he identified were irritation of the throat and mouth, coughing and respiratory infections, while warning that some long term consequences may take years to become fully visible.
The growing diversity of nicotine products has also been documented by civil society organisations.
In February 2026, Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa published a report titled New Smoke Trap, based on field surveillance conducted in Lagos, Enugu and the Federal Capital Territory between October and December 2025.
The researchers documented 781 tobacco and nicotine related products, including 573 classified as new and emerging nicotine and tobacco products. E cigarettes alone accounted for 522 products.
The concern is not simply the number of products but the variety and the environments in which they are becoming visible.
According to the report, many of the products are compact, flavoured and designed in ways that resemble everyday consumer items. Researchers documented their presence in supermarkets, nightlife venues and digital spaces frequented by young people.
For public health advocates, that raises an obvious question. Is Nigeria witnessing the emergence of a new generation of nicotine consumers under a new vocabulary?
The National Tobacco Control Act Amendment Bill, 2025, which is awaiting presidential assent, has intensified those concerns.
Clause 1 of the proposed amendment introduces a new objective said to be in consonance with Tobacco Harm Reduction objectives, while also expanding the framework to cover non combustible products. The bill creates a statutory category for non combustible tobacco and nicotine products.
Civil society organisations have questioned provisions that could permit advertising of non combustible products in adult publications, at points of sale and online, as well as sponsorship of cultural and social events. They have also raised concerns about the proposed introduction of harm reduction as a policy objective, warning requirements and the classification of heated tobacco products as non combustible products.
At stake is not simply how products are described but how widely they can be marketed, who they can reach and how aggressively the industry can position them in the Nigerian marketplace.
The tobacco industry’s record of attempting to influence public policy is well documented. Such efforts have historically involved lobbying, third party organisations, public relations campaigns, corporate social responsibility programmes, research activities and other forms of engagement.
This history is central to the debate.
Article 5.3 of the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control was created because countries recognise the fundamental conflict between the commercial interests of the tobacco industry and the protection of public health.
The WHO has also warned about the industry’s use of harm reduction rhetoric.
A WHO FCTC presentation in 2025 described harm reduction marketing rhetoric as part of a wider industry redemption narrative and warned that tobacco companies were reinventing familiar strategies to influence politics, public opinion and science.
The message from Article 5.3 is straightforward. Governments have a responsibility to protect tobacco control policies from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.
Its implementation guidelines recommend limiting unnecessary interactions with tobacco companies, ensuring transparency in government and industry engagements, preventing conflicts of interest, scrutinising information provided by the industry and protecting policymaking from commercial influence.
For Nigeria, the central issue should therefore be whether new nicotine products are genuinely reducing harm or whether the language of harm reduction is being used to open another door into the lives of young consumers.
A country still struggling to effectively enforce existing tobacco control laws cannot afford to create regulatory loopholes that may allow the nicotine market to expand faster than public health safeguards.
Nigeria must put the protection of public health ahead of the commercial interests of an industry whose products are inherently addictive.
The President, leaders of the National Assembly and other stakeholders should subject the National Tobacco Control Act Amendment Bill, 2025, to rigorous and independent scrutiny before any further action is taken.
Any proposal to make Tobacco Harm Reduction an explicit policy objective deserves particularly close examination, especially where it could weaken advertising restrictions, expand market access or create opportunities for industry influence.
Government must also ensure that tobacco industry interests do not undermine the enforcement of existing laws and regulations. The principles contained in Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control should guide all interactions between public officials and the tobacco and nicotine industry.
The real test is not whether Nigeria can accommodate every new nicotine product entering the market. The real test is whether the country can protect another generation from becoming addicted while the industry searches for new ways to sell the same old substance.
Audu’s story is a reminder of what is at stake. At 21, he should have been looking forward to life.
Instead, his experience has become a warning about where the tobacco industry can lead.
0 Comments