Banning Flavored E-Cigarettes May Lead to More Traditional Cigarette Use Among Young Adults

A growing body of evidence suggests that bans on flavored e-cigarettes might have unintended consequences—especially among young adults. While these restrictions aim to curb youth vaping, recent studies reveal they may actually drive more individuals toward conventional cigarette smoking. 

The Data Speaks: Vaping Down, Smoking Up 

A recent analysis by Mass General Brigham found that flavor bans led to a significant drop in vaping among both young adults and older users—but also slowed the decline in cigarette smoking rates in states that enacted the bans. 

Similarly, research published in JAMA Health Forum demonstrated a substitution effect: reduced vaping, paired with a noticeable increase in smoking among young adults. For every five fewer daily vapers, approximately three to four additional individuals picked up cigarettes. 

Additional studies using national surveys like the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System confirmed these findings—showing that daily vaping declined by about 3.6 percentage points, while daily smoking rose by 2.2 percentage points among adults aged 18–29 in states with flavor restrictions.  

Understanding the Substitution Effect 

These trends echo across multiple datasets: banning flavored e-cigarettes reduces youth and young adult vaping, but they can also trigger a switch to more harmful combustible cigarettes. The reasons include: 

• Nicotine Dependence: Young adults who previously used flavored vapes may still seek nicotine and revert to traditional smoking. 
• Loss of Appeal: Removing flavors makes vaping less attractive, potentially undermining its role as an alternative for smokers. 

What Experts Recommend 

Rather than full bans alone, public health professionals warn that complementary strategies are essential: 

• Education and Outreach: Campaigns that address both vaping and smoking risks can help discourage substitution. 
• Support Services: Increased availability of cessation tools and guidance supports intentional quitting over product switching. 
• Regulated Market Access: Controlled access to safer alternatives may help reduce tobacco harm without boosting cigarette use. 

As the Profolus analysis concludes, flavor bans—which successfully curb vaping—need supplemental measures to avoid unintentionally bolstering cigarette smoking. 

Final Thoughts 

While flavor restrictions are a step toward protecting youth from nicotine addiction, the emerging evidence paints a more complex picture. Policymakers must consider the full landscape and unintended outcomes—embedding cessation support, education, and tailored access into prevention efforts to ensure public health goals are fully met.