Research shows limited impact of ban on flavored e-cigarettes

Dec.01.2022
Research shows limited impact of ban on flavored e-cigarettes
The US ban on flavored e-cigarettes has had limited effectiveness, as users turn to alternative products and flavors.

On February 6, 2020, the United States Food and Drug Administration banned the sale of several flavors of electronic cigarettes, with some significant exceptions.


According to a survey published in the journal "Tobacco Control," out of 3500 adult users of electronic cigarettes who were surveyed, less than 5% of them stopped using electronic cigarettes due to the ban on flavored e-cigarettes. The remaining respondents switched to other types or flavors of electronic cigarettes or other tobacco products that were not covered by the ban.


More and more literature suggests that the flavorings in e-cigarettes can cause harm when inhaled, making a ban on these flavorings reasonable, according to tobacco research expert and Professor of Public Health Sciences and Community Center Deborah J. Ossip. "But bans don't seem to be effective. People, including young people, can still access flavored products and are still using them," she added. This statement was made at the University of Rochester Medical Center's Department of Public Health and Prevention.


According to Dongmei Li, the lead author of the study and associate professor of clinical and translational research, obstetrics and gynecology, and public health sciences, a significant part of the problem is that the ban does not cover newer products such as disposable e-cigarette pods and e-cigarette pods that use canisters instead of cartridges/boxes.


Other forms of flavored electronic cigarettes, particularly disposable ones, have become very popular after FDA policies were implemented," said Li. "The FDA's policies did not prohibit products with mint or tobacco flavors - our research indicates that many people switched to mint-flavored e-cigarettes after the ban. It seems that many people find menthol to be a favorable taste.


According to this study, nearly 30% of the survey respondents switched to canned or disposable flavored e-cigarettes, and another 30% switched to mint or tobacco flavored pods. Some reported turning to traditional tobacco products: 14% switched to combustible products like cigarettes, and 5% switched to smokeless products such as chewing or dipping tobacco. Less than 5% of respondents stopped using e-cigarettes after the FDA ban.


Researchers used statistical models to identify factors related to changes in e-cigarette usage behavior. They found a close correlation between using tank system e-cigarettes and switching to other flavors not regulated by the FDA's flavor law enforcement policies.


The use of mint-flavored electronic cigarettes over the past 30 days is associated with switching to mint-flavored electronic cigarettes. Those who reported smoking every day or every few days were more likely to switch to tobacco-flavored electronic cigarettes or combustible tobacco products.


On the other hand, people who use flavored electronic cigarettes without nicotine are more likely to quit smoking. Although the study was not intended to establish a causal relationship, the association supports previous research showing that reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes can help smokers quit. However, further research is needed to better understand the relationship between the use of low-nicotine electronic cigarettes and smoking cessation.


Looking towards the future, Li Dongmei believes that if this policy covers all flavors of electronic cigarettes (including mint and all types of electronic cigarettes) and actively monitors the implementation and compliance of the policy, then the policy may be effective. "Both are important in reducing the popularity of electronic cigarettes among young people in the United States," she said.


2FIRSTS will continue to cover this topic, with updates available on the "2FIRSTS APP". Scan the QR code below to download the app.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
U.S. Customs and Border Protection ruled that STIIIZY had not shown that the redesigned cannabis-vape products covered by its latest request fall outside an ITC limited exclusion order tied to PAX Labs patents. CBP accepted some of STIIIZY’s claim-construction and non-infringement arguments, but the company did not address two additional claims in the same patent. Earlier STIIIZY redesigned cartridges and certain associated components imported with them had received separate CBP clearance.
Sep.16
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01
Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration published a final decision on September 25 to classify 6-methylnicotine as a Schedule 9 prohibited substance under the Poisons Standard, effective October 1, 2026. TGA said the chemical has been reported in e-cigarette liquids sold in Australia and marketed as nicotine-free or nicotine alternatives, while evidence also indicates its use in preparations such as oral pouches. The government originally proposed a Schedule 7 classification but ultimately adopted the stricter Schedule 9 designation, citing acute toxicity, dependence risk, use in unapproved consumer products and misleading marketing.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
NATO Executive Director David Spross Sees U.S. Vape Regulation Improving, Calls for More PMTA Authorizations and Warns of 2027 State Tax Pressure
NATO Executive Director David Spross Sees U.S. Vape Regulation Improving, Calls for More PMTA Authorizations and Warns of 2027 State Tax Pressure
The National Association of Tobacco Outlets is calling for more FDA marketing authorizations, greater transparency in the PMTA process and continued enforcement against unauthorized e-cigarettes, even as its executive director, David Spross, points to recent regulatory developments as signs of progress. At the state level, excise taxes, flavor restrictions and vapor product directories remain major issues for tobacco retailers. By August 2026, 17 states had enacted laws establishing state-managed e-cigarette directories or similar systems.
Innovation
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Australia Tobacco Tax Debate Spreads Within Labor as NSW Premier Minns Reaffirms Support for a Cut
Australia Tobacco Tax Debate Spreads Within Labor as NSW Premier Minns Reaffirms Support for a Cut
Australia’s tobacco excise debate is increasingly exposing differences within the governing Labor Party. New South Wales Labor Premier Chris Minns reaffirmed on September 8 that he supports reducing tobacco excise, arguing that current tax settings are pushing consumers toward cheaper black-market cigarettes. Federal Health Minister Mark Butler continues to oppose an excise cut, while Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino have recently stopped short of ruling out future changes. The divergence follows the opposition Coalition’s proposal to cut tobacco excise by 80%.
Sep.08
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10