Singapore blocks website selling e-cigarettes disguised as stationery

Oct.22.2024
Singapore blocks website selling e-cigarettes disguised as stationery
Singapore blocks website selling e-cigarettes disguised as stationery after Malaysia reports fake products resembling popular brands.

Singapore has blocked a website selling e-cigarettes disguised as stationery products, following similar cases reported in Malaysia, according to a report in the Straits Times on 22 October.

 

The Public Health Malaysia Facebook page, run by a group of public health experts, posted photos on 3 October reminding parents and teachers to be wary of these e-cigarettes, which resemble popular stationery brands such as markers and glue sticks.

 

On October 21, the media outlet "The Straits Times" discovered that a website selling an e-cigarette resembling a highlighter and capable of delivering to Singapore is inaccessible.

 

A female spokesperson from the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) in Singapore responded to queries from the media by stating that they have collaborated with the Infocomm Media Development Authority to block access for Singapore residents to the Malaysian website.

 

The HSA is aware of a trend overseas where users are modifying the appearance of e-cigarettes to resemble everyday stationery items. We are monitoring these e-cigarettes.

 

The spokeswoman added that from January to September, the HSA removed more than 6,000 illegal e-cigarette-related posts. In addition, HSA is working with e-commerce websites and online platforms such as Instagram, Facebook and Carousell to remove such content as soon as it is detected. She also stated that HSA will track any illegal e-cigarette-related activity on social media platforms and messaging apps.

 

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

UK-Listed Consumer Goods Group Supreme Sees Vape Duty as Potential Consolidation Opportunity, Holds FY27 Outlook
UK-Listed Consumer Goods Group Supreme Sees Vape Duty as Potential Consolidation Opportunity, Holds FY27 Outlook
UK-listed consumer goods group Supreme plc says it continues to expect FY27 trading to meet market expectations as the Vaping Products Duty takes effect on October 1, while maintaining a comparatively positive view of the new tax and compliance regime. Supreme has said the framework could increase compliance complexity for smaller operators and contribute to market consolidation, while its manufacturing, compliance and distribution scale may allow it to gain share. Its 88Vape brand will retain its value positioning.
Sep.18
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial Co., Ltd. has filed a patent application for an oral nicotine delivery product designed to let users actively adjust nicotine release. The product embeds two types of nicotine reservoirs with different wall thicknesses and positions inside a deformable matrix. Pressure applied with the tongue or lips can rupture the reservoirs and accelerate nicotine release. In simulated oral tests, several patent examples showed sharply higher peak nicotine release rates as applied force increased from 0 N to 1 N and 3 N. The filing explores a shift from preset release profiles toward user-triggered nicotine delivery.
Sep.01
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
California Lawmakers Pass Disposable Nicotine Vape Ban, With Sales Prohibition Set for 2028
According to CBS Los Angeles on August 27, 2026, California lawmakers have passed Assembly Bill 762, which would phase out disposable, battery-embedded nicotine vapes in the state. If signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, manufacturing and importation of the covered products would be prohibited beginning January 1, 2027, followed by a sales ban on January 1, 2028. Driven primarily by concerns over electronic waste, lithium-battery fires and environmental pollution, the legislation would further shift California’s legal vape market toward rechargeable, refillable or replaceable-pod devices.
Aug.28
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Three R.J. Reynolds companies are seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY challenging the FDA's 2021 PMTA final rule. The companies dispute how the agency uses Acceptance and Filing reviews and completeness determinations to establish when the Tobacco Control Act's 180-day decision period begins. Reynolds has also linked prolonged PMTA reviews to competition from unauthorized vaping products. The FDA, meanwhile, has been accelerating reviews and reducing its backlog.
Sep.14
Product | JTI Introduces Fully Dissolvable PERLZ Nicotine Pearls in UK, Expands Range From 30-Pearl Dispensers to 10-Pearl Sachets
Product | JTI Introduces Fully Dissolvable PERLZ Nicotine Pearls in UK, Expands Range From 30-Pearl Dispensers to 10-Pearl Sachets
Japan Tobacco International (JTI) has introduced PERLZ nicotine pearls in the UK, expanding its oral nicotine portfolio beyond conventional nicotine pouches. The fully dissolvable, multi-layer pearls are placed under the tongue and come in Mint and Berry flavors at concentrations of 1mg/g and 2mg/g, equivalent to approximately 0.3mg and 0.5mg of nicotine per pearl. UK retailer Haypp published four 30-pearl dispenser listings on July 31, 2026, followed by three 10-pearl sachet products on August 17. The dispensers retail for £6.50, while the sachets cost £2.50.
product
Oct.12
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the FDA’s denial of MH Global LLC’s applications to market flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The court ruled that FDA’s comparative-efficacy framework, which requires applicants to show that flavored products provide greater cessation or switching benefits than tobacco-flavored alternatives, is consistent with the Tobacco Control Act’s “appropriate for the protection of the public health” standard. The court also found that FDA was not required to establish the framework through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Aug.26