More Evidence that Bans on Flavored Vaping Products May Increase Teen Smoking

Policies that increase the use of traditional cigarettes are unlikely to improve public health.

Two new studies posted by the National Bureau of Economic Research find evidence that bans on flavored vaping products may increase youth smoking. This is consistent with prior research showing that policies that make vaping products less available or more expensive can lead to higher youth smoking rates.

The first study is "The Effect of E-Cigarette Flavor Bans on Tobacco Use," by Chad D. Cotti, Charles J. Courtemanche, Yang Liang, Johanna Catherine Maclean, Erik T. Nesson & Joseph J. Sabia. Here is the abstract:

Advocates for sales restrictions on flavored e-cigarettes argue that flavors appeal to young people and lead them down a path to nicotine addiction. This study is among the first to examine the effect of state and local restrictions on the sale of flavored electronic nicotine delivery system products on youth and young adult tobacco use. Using data from the State and National Youth Risk Behavior Surveys, we find that the adoption of an ENDS flavor restriction reduces frequent and everyday youth ENDS use by 1.2 to 2.5 percentage points. Auxiliary analyses of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System show similar effects on ENDS use for young adults ages 18-20. However, we also detect evidence of an unintended effect of ENDS flavor restrictions that is especially clear among 18-20-year-olds: inducing substitution to combustible cigarette smoking. Finally, there is no evidence that ENDS flavor restrictions affect ENDS use among adults aged 21 and older or non-tobacco-related health behaviors such as binge drinking and illicit drug use.

The second study is "Comprehensive E-cigarette Flavor Bans and Tobacco Use among Youth and Adults," by Henry Saffer, Selen Ozdogan, Michael Grossman, Daniel L. Dench & Dhaval M. Dave. Here is the abstract: 

The vast majority of youth e-cigarette users consume flavored e-cigarettes, raising concerns from public health advocates that flavors may drive youth initiation into and continued use of e-cigarettes. Flavors drew further notice from the public health community following the sudden outbreak of lung injury among vapers in 2019, prompting several states to enact sweeping bans on flavored e-cigarettes. In this study, we examine the effects of these comprehensive bans on e-cigarette use and potential spillovers into other tobacco use by youth, young adults, and adults. We utilize both standard difference-in-differences (DID) and synthetic DID methods, in conjunction with four national data sets. We find evidence that young adults decrease their use of the banned flavored e-cigarettes as well as their overall e-cigarette use, by about two percentage points, while increasing cigarette use. For youth, there is some suggestive evidence of increasing cigarette use, though these results are contaminated by pre-trend differences between treatment and control units. The bans have no effect on e-cigarette and smoking participation among older adults (ages 25+). Our findings suggest that statewide comprehensive flavor bans may have generated an unintended consequence by encouraging substitution towards traditional smoking in some populations.

While the empirical evidence that restrictions on vaping products, including flavor bans, threaten to increase youth smoking continues to accumulate, federal agencies are looking the other way. This is no way to enhance the protection of public health.

The Food & Drug Administration, for its part, has largely excluded the consideration of such effects when evaluating vaping product applications. In reviewing such applications, the FDA focuses on product-specific information to the exclusion of any consideration of how the availability of whole product categories (such as flavored e-cigs) may affect consumer behavior. This is but one small part of the FDA's overall vaping problem.  

Comments

[jimc5499]

Democrat run States have borrowed heavily against their share of the Tobacco Settlement. Vaping is cutting down on tobacco revenue so they have to do something to increase the number of smokers.

[hobie]

Here in red Ohio, they just banned menthol flavored cigarettes: preferred flavor for negroes. Like children, blacks need to be protected from predatory products and their own preferences. They never seem to ban Skoal though.

[Frank Drackman]

You know alot of Knee-grows do you? You obviously don’t know Major League Baseball (Frankie Knows Baseball) MLB banned use of smokeless Tobacco for Rookies in 2016, existing users were grandfathered in like did with Spitballers in the 1920’s (Spit doesn’t work as well as KY, not a “Foreign Substance” it’s made right in in the US of A)

Frank

[Bob from Ohio]

“red Ohio, they just banned menthol flavored cigarette”

Not exactly.

“Judge rules Ohio law that keeps cities from banning flavored tobacco is unconstitutional” AP By BRUCE SHIPKOWSKI
Updated 2:54 PM EDT, May 20, 2024

Black majority cities passed ordinances banning them. State passed law saying they couldn’t. Democrat judge said the state law violated the Ohio constitutional.

So a bunch of Democrats banned it in 12 cities and valiant GOPers tried to respect black choices. But another racist white democrat foiled them for now.

[hobie]

Well, then I salute the Republicans for doing so. I don’t see why black city dwellers would vote against their own interests like that. Then again, I don’t know anyone around this hood that actually votes. But they do love their menthols though

[Kazinski]

What’s interesting is how you could get that so wrong, whether you misread it or some ultra a partisan news source intentionally misrepresented what happened.

If that’s what a news provider was telling you then you should be a lot more skeptical about what they are feeding you.

[Frank Drackman]

And they have better rhythm (did you catch the “Second Gentleman” doing his “White Boy Dance” at the White House Juneteenth party? I admit, it’s easy to overlook as he’s got Sleepy Joe frozen with a Sardonic Grin to his left, and a bearded woman to his right) and more fast twitch muscle than other races.

Frank

[Kazinski]

The thing about skoal is that it too is much safer than smoking, although not near as safe as vaping.

But that didn’t stop the scare campaign that probably cost lives by steering more people back to smoking.

[Frank Drackman]

I switched to Cigars thanks to Rush Limbo and Marriage-a-Juan-a thanks to Bob Marley.

[Frank Drackman]

Eeek! Someone having a good time! Love taking out a strong Cigar during a long flight, don’t smoke it of course, just enjoy the aroma, and the irritation of the nattering nabobs trying to find some regulation about having an unlit Cigar onboard (there aren’t any)
Frank

[DZM212]

Shorter Adler: “We shouldn’t make laws to discourage childhood addiction; after all, some children might get addicted to something more dangerous, because they’re already addicted to this product we haven’t banned yet!”

Stunning logic. Saved you all some time

[Noscitur a sociis]

Shorter DZM212: “Who cares if our policies actually make anything better, as long as we think of the children!”

Not sure if I saved anyone any time.

[Social Justice is neither]

Isn’t “think of the children” a Democrat standard? And suddenly evidence is a thing you care about? The party of degeneracy and addiction is just hewing to it’s desire here.

[hobie]

Might want to poll the party affiliation of the millions of hillbilly heroin addicts. Which reminds me, looks like narcotic addiction among gun buyers could be a legal thing now

[Frank Drackman]

Wow, not only are you a Valor Stealer, now you’re projecting your shortcomings on a demographic group that would literally cut you into little pieces and feed them to the dogs (I’m not a member) Sort of like Sleepy Joe and the other DemoKKKrat’s did back in the 80’s when they made the sentences for Crack 10x as long as the same amount of Powder Cocaine. Took “45” to commute some of the more egregious cases during his term, part of why he’ll get 25% of the Black Mail Vote, and a landslide in November

Frank

[DZM212]

My comment did not express an opinion on the policy banning flavored vapes, which I do not support. I have no problem with the sale of addictive substances to adults, in fact, repeal the ban and let’s legalize more drugs while we’re at it!

My comment was about the BOLDED evidence which Adler cites- that “young adults [read: those who just aged into adulthood] decrease their use of the banned flavored e-cigarettes as well as their overall e-cigarette use, by about two percentage points, while increasing cigarette use.” That is, the study looked at young adults who became addicted to nicotine while children, and then lost access to those and turned to cigarettes to fuel that addiction. This is, logically, not a trend likely to persist if the status of flavored vapes remains the same. This is a poorly-designed study, if your goal is to show that in the long term flavored vape bans increase cigarette smoking, which is really what Adler is clearly trying to imply.

That was the point of my comment, which, if you read carefully, was about this problem, and not at all the strawman argument you made up on your head. My reference to children was to emphasize that, ideally, addictive substances should not be sold to that demographic. But apparently I turned out to be Helen Lovejoy, in your mind, for some reason? Go off, bro

[Rossami]

Addiction is not, per se, dangerous. Are you worried about your addiction to oxygen? Or to water, food, nice haircuts or any of the other things that your routinely enjoy?

Addiction is only a problem when you are addicted to things that are themselves dangerous. And, yes, if you the choice is a social policy that increases potential addiction to a more dangerous thing or to a less dangerous thing, the rational choice is the less dangerous thing.

[Frank Drackman]

Another Shyster trying to play Doctor, Breathing Oxygen doesn’t meet the Criteria for Addiction, most peoples are perfectly happy breathing Jay-Hey’s 21%, and the quitters don’t do well. Good thing is they never relapse.

Frank

[Jonathansingletary]

Addiction is by definition harmful. You lack understanding of what addiction actually is or how it’s defined.

[Frank Drackman]

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, did I tell you you’re wrong?. My Mom’s been playing Mah-Jong every week since she met my Dad, and they’ve been married 63 years. Coincidentally, he’s never played.

Frank

[DZM212]

Read the bolded text in the citation of the post.

There’s no evidence in this study for the future ‘potential addiction’ of new cigarette users, because the cohort they studied had readily available flavored vapes, as children, to develop their nicotine addiction. You notice that the percentage of vape users in that age group went down? Presumably, there is a similar trend in <18 y/os, and in a short period of time this bump in cigarette smoking in the 18-20 cohort will return to baseline.

This whole post is designed to fool stupid people with a headline- it clearly implies that banning flavored vapes somehow induces more new, non nicotine-addicted children to take up smoking, for ?reasons? Oh, hey, it's you! You're the stupid person the post was designed to fool!

For the record, I support, in general, measures to decrease the use of addictive substances (not oxygen or 'nice haircuts'), for children. However, I do not think the banning of flavored vapes accomplishes that in any meaningful way, so I don't support the policy. I'm an adult and if I want to consume fruity nicotine vapor that's my God given right, thank you very much.

But whatever, you are stupid enough to equate physiological requirements and 'nice haircuts' (who exactly is addicted to that, was there a My Strange Addiction episode?) to nicotine. Which is one of the most addictive drugs available without prescription. Cool comparisons, bro! I'm not holding my breath on your reading comprehension or analytical abilities, tho.

[Stephen Lathrop]

What you want to consume is not in question. The policy question is whether it is wise public policy to permit an industry based on addiction-based marketing. It is not wise.

[Kazinski]

There isn’t much evidence that nicotine on its own without the tar from tobacco is anymore dangerous than caffeine, which is also addictive.

Its well known that nicotine does provide some benefits combating anxiety, and promoting better mental acuity. Spend some time around a mental health treatment facility and you may notice a huge propensity for people with mental illness self medicating with nicotine.

Sure there can be some social problems with addictive substances, but they get worse when you make them illegal.

Outlaw caffeine and I’m not sure I wouldn’t rob, steal, smuggle or worse to get my fix. Prohibition doesn’t work.

[Frank Drackman]

In the 80’s most ER’s had IV Caffeine, used to treat Migraines (and being sleepy on call) back before the Triptans came out. Was also great for Asthma, there was also Theophylline, which was 2 Caffeine molecules joined together. For fun we’d put a 1000mg in a 500cc bag of Normal Saline, titrate the rate until you were having 5-6 PVC’s a minute. Man, I think my ears are still ringing.

Frank

[DZM212]

I’m only opposed to the sale of addictive shit to kids.

My issue is with weird implication of the post that the shift in this age group to cigarettes is a long term trend, and not a transient response to the change in legal status. In the long term, the data seems to suggest that this bump will pass, because fewer 18-20 y/o were vaping. If that trend is also true in the younger age group, then it seems probable that future age groups would not see the same increase. It seems dishonest to suggest that banning flavored vapes will lead to a durable increase in the number of young people smoking, from this data, and that’s what the headline and article do. Just see the comments for how many people now believe that ‘banning flavored vapes increases teen smoking” even though the study said “In this age group, under these circumstances, cigarette smoking increased”

[DIsrobing]

I’d be curious if Mr. Adler directly or indirectly receives funding from vape manufacturers or tobacco companies?

[Kazinski]

And he’s probably kicking it some to back to EV too.

As a pro-vaping commenter, I can assure you I get regular checks for my advocacy.

You should find a more savory blog to frequent.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I am wary of drug prohibition for adults, including if the idea is that you need it to protect minors.

[Frank Drackman]

I’m for freedom of choice, but with the Radon, Ozone, Asbestos, do Minors really need Nicotine on top of it?

[QuantumBoxCat]

Boop

[DZM212]

I hate when people try to mislead their readers. The study says nothing about the future ise of cigarettes by teenagers due the effects of the flavored vape ban. It addresses the effect on a narrow age group with unique circumstances- flavored vapes were freely available (to the extent that any nicotine product is to someone under age), while they were children. This is not true for future cohorts, so the data predicts nothing about future nicotine use.

I don’t support this policy, as I have said elsewhere, for a number of reasons. Fruity nicotine vapor is my God-given right, and I don’t think adults should be unable to enjoy anything which children could conceivably obtain. Indeed, that’s my main problem with it- I don’t think the policy meaningfully affects the use of nicotine by actual children. A larger than proportionate share of children are always going to smoke, drink, drive recklessly, trespass, and generally raise havoc, breaking laws, because they don’t have functional frontal lobes. But the solution is to, I dunno, vote for people who agree with you on that stuff, educate or lobby your neighbors to change laws, with true facts, etc. But I ideologically oppose the writing of tendentious articles implying something not supported by the study cited, because to me, that’s a lie. I’d like it if fewer people lied, even if it fits my policy goals, is all.

[QuantumBoxCat]

Scene: Young adult in convenience store

Clerk: Hi. What can I do for you?

Young adult: Yeah, I’ll take a bubblegum flavored vape.

Clerk: Sorry, that flavor has been banned. We have a variety of other flavors available though.

Young adult: Damnit! Just give me a pack of Marlboro Reds then.

[Frank Drackman]

Problem with Vaping is 1: you look like a Dork, 2: you don’t get all of the cool ancillaries you get with Cigarettes, putting the pack under the sleeve of your white T-shirt like James Dean in East of Eden, letting the Cig droop from your mouth like Marlon Brando in The Wild Bunch, Lighting a chicks Cig with your own Cig like Travolta in Pulp Fiction, Burning a Terminator T1000 on the Chest when he asks for your Clothes, your Boots, and your Motorcycle. Hitting the bottom of a new pack of Cigs with your hand to “Pack” the Tobacco, and last but not least, Would X-files have been such a hit if they had “Vaping Man” instead of “Cigarette Smoking Man”?

Frank “Hey Dork, that’s a Hard Pack”