E-cigarettes Banned, But Cigarettes Remain: Malaysian Policy Confusing

Recently, there has been a nationwide call in Malaysia to ban e-cigarettes, which has dominated the headlines of major media outlets. Just a few days ago, the member of parliament from Setapak, R. Yuneswaran, urged the federal government to implement a comprehensive ban, citing rising medical costs and the increasing usage of e-cigarettes among teenagers. Meanwhile, states such as Selangor, Kelantan, Johor, Sarawak, and Terengganu have begun to implement their own bans or are discussing similar measures.
These measures are driven by understandable public health concerns. No one questions the motives behind these calls. After all, nothing is more important than public health. However, are we handling this issue in a consistent and coherent manner?
If the ban on e-cigarettes is implemented to protect public health, then why are cigarettes - a product known to cause cancer, heart disease, and countless other illnesses - still legally sold and taxed? According to data from the Ministry of Health, tobacco use remains one of the leading preventable causes of death in Malaysia. However, despite the gradual ban or restriction of e-cigarettes, cigarettes remain a common sight in convenience stores across the country.
Given the fragmented nature of current policy responses, this inconsistency is even more worrying. Some states are implementing their own bans, while others are not. The federal government has not yet taken a clear and unified stance. As a result, the rules vary across the country. This inevitably causes confusion for the public, presents challenges for law enforcement, and provides opportunities for the illegal market to thrive.
Moreover, this could also set a questionable policy precedent. If the principle is that we should ban products that may harm public health, then how should we define our bottom line? Should we also ban junk food, sugary drinks, or alcohol, as they can lead to non-communicable diseases and increase medical costs? I am not suggesting that we ignore the risks posed by e-cigarettes. But we should be vigilant and avoid making selective, passive policy decisions without a consistent framework.
Rather than implementing a blanket ban in an unbalanced and fragmented manner, we should adopt more balanced and coherent measures. Stronger public education campaigns, stricter regulation of marketing and sales (especially for marketing and sales to minors), and unified law enforcement by each state might ultimately be more effective than a simple ban.
Most importantly, public health policies should be regarded as fair, reasonable, and consistent. If a strategy seems to target only certain products while ignoring other products that have been proven to be harmful, it may damage public trust. It may also distract the public from broader efforts to build a healthier society.
Public health must always come first. But in the pursuit of this goal, we should avoid taking contradictory or populist measures that may attract attention but may not necessarily lead to better results.