David: The biggest wish I would have for Canada, which is for so many other countries, is essentially follow the principles of the Enlightenment. Stop paying attention to the people who see this in moralistic terms, who are distorting the science, start paying attention to the science. Look at what we know about differentials and risk. Look at what we know about the hazards from cigarette smoking. Look at what we're seeing in terms of substitution effects, where people get access to alternative products, use reason to look at what could we accomplish if we started using what we know and the products that we have. How far could we go, how much could we adapt, how many lives could we save and use humanism? Think about the people, their lived experience, the reason these people are smoking cigarettes, how many of them are going to die unnecessarily because of a dirty delivery system when we know what we can do? So that's my hope, that we can simply do what we're already seeing in Canada on things like Opioid policy, what we've seen on so many other areas of policy. We need to get rational on this one. And the upside if we do that is just tremendous pros and cons here that the good news is that we are seeing countries that are moving on substitution effects of having lower risk products replacing cigarettes, and the progress is dramatic. And that is happening in countries like Japan, which has reduced cigarette sales by half in just six and a half years. New Zealand is now rapidly reducing cigarette sales as the UK. We're seeing rapid reductions in countries even where they've stymied access to low risk products like Canada and the US. It still seems to explain most of what we're seeing in the decline in smoking. So there's really important things going on, and it's happening despite consumers not being given a wide range of alternatives in any country, not being given adequate information in any country, not being prompted with effective regulatory policies that are risk proportionate in any country. And we're still seeing this happen. But I think in 2023 we are still going to see it only happening slowly, a few more countries, a little more rapid, and there is going to be huge opposition in Canada as elsewhere from the people who think they're battling sin and are therefore perpetuating a cigarette epidemic.
Will: Here in the US. And staying within the realms of realistic possibility. I would hope for real improvements to the FDA's handling of PMTA authorizations for vapes. An optimistic scenario might see changes forced upon the agency by the findings of the Reagan Udal Foundation review, for example, or victories in some of the court cases brought by small vape companies over their PMTA rejections. Authorization at long last for some nontobacco flavored products would be huge for the many people who rely on them to quit smoking. Obviously, I'd also hope for no more local vape bans and successful challenges to those that exist, like the new ban in California, some broader wishes would be vastly improved messaging on THR from public health authorities and better understanding from groups like doctors to support more THR uptake in the states. Unfortunately, the picture will probably be much messier and less positive. A sea change to the FDA's approach seems unlikely. Even if isolated, further authorizations for big companies could well happen. And while Colorado showed this year that Vape bans can be successfully opposed, continuing back and forth struggle in legislatures and the courts seems likelier than any decisive breakthrough. We may have specific examples of good news in 2023, but overall, sadly, I think we can expect damaging misinformation and groundless restrictions and enforcement to continue.