The ‘soft’ policies mentioned above compete with advanced marketing and sales of unhealthy commodity industries. For instance, considering the deadly and addictive design of cigarettes, stronger policies such as taxes, advertising and sales bans are necessary to counteract the commercial push. Comprehensive advertising bans in various settings (schools, hospitals, restaurants) have been associated with significant reductions in smoking rates [
19]. As part of the National Prevention Agreement in the Netherlands, the visible display of tobacco products in stores has not been allowed since 2020. Still, the Dutch Institute for Public Health and the Environment concluded that additional measures on top of the National Prevention Agreement are needed to protect children and pregnant women from the harmful effects of smoking [
20]. Institutional smoking bans have also led to reduced smoking rates in hospitals (odds ratio (OR) 0.76; 95% CI: 0.69–0.81) and universities (OR 0.72; 95% CI: 0.64–0.80) [
21]. In prisons, there was a 9% reduction in smoking-related mortality (incidence ratio 0.91; 95% CI: 0.88–0.95) [
22]. The smoke-free legislation in the United Kingdom—prohibiting smoking in all enclosed public areas and workplaces—has contributed to an estimated 1200 fewer hospital admissions for myocardial infarctions in the 1st year [
23].
In 1776, Adam Smith noted that ‘sugar, rum and tobacco are commodities which are nowhere necessaries of life …which are …objects of almost universal consumption, and which are therefore extremely proper subjects of taxation’ [
24]. Currently, substantial and regular increases in the price of tobacco products are considered the most effective policy measure to reduce smoking, including in people in low socio-economic positions [
25,
26]. Similarly, higher alcoholic beverage tax is associated with lower alcohol consumption, as regards both frequency and intensity [
26], and sugar-sweetened beverage taxation reduces sugar-sweetened beverage sales [
27]. The same US food policy model that estimated the impact of a mass media campaign suggested that a 10% reduction in the price of fruit and vegetables would prevent 153,300 CVD deaths (95% CI: 146,400–159,200) [
9]. While neither a subsidy on fruit and vegetables nor a sugar-sweetened beverage tax is currently included in the National Prevention Agreement in the Netherlands [
20], the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment listed them as a top priority for additional measures in the prevention of obesity and associated chronic diseases [
28]. A simulation study in the United Kingdom estimated that prohibiting television advertising of unhealthy foods and beverages during daytime would result in 40,000 fewer children with obesity, ultimately possibly averting the loss of 240,000 disability-adjusted life years [
29]. Finally, more intense alcohol licensing policies can contribute to a 5% reduction in alcohol-related admission rates [
30].