Study Links E-Cigarette Bans to Increased Cigarette Sales

Apr.08.2022
Study Links E-Cigarette Bans to Increased Cigarette Sales
A new study suggests that state-level e-cigarette bans are associated with increased cigarette sales.

According to foreign media reports, a new study suggests that a national ban on e-cigarettes is linked to an increase in cigarette sales. The study, published in the scientific journal "Health Affairs," adds to mounting evidence that banning the sale of e-cigarettes may lead more people to revert back to smoking, which is less safe than using nicotine alternatives.

 

During a three-month study, it was found that an additional 3.4 million cigarette packs were sold through convenience stores across three states.

 

Researchers have used state-level cigarette sales data to discover that Massachusetts, which has implemented a complete ban on nicotine e-cigarettes, has seen a 7.5% increase in per capita cigarette sales compared to expectations. Rhode Island and Washington, which have enacted bans on non-tobacco flavored nicotine e-cigarettes, have an average estimated increase of 4.6% in per capita cigarette sales compared to expectations. Based on actual and estimated cigarette sales, the researchers suggest that an additional 3.4 million cigarette packs were sold in convenience stores across the three states during the three-month study period following the implementation of their respective bans.

 

The study was sponsored by Juul Labs, but has had little impact thus far, possibly due to the belief among many in the tobacco control field that research funded by the industry is biased. This debate may stem from decades of data suppression by big tobacco companies, which has recently resurfaced. For example, the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) now explicitly prohibits industry-sponsored speakers from presenting at its conferences, a move that has led to resignations and condemnation of current tobacco control as "anti-scientific".

 

Researchers examined data from the fall of 2019, when legislators began paying attention to a series of mysterious lung diseases referred to as EVALI, which were quickly associated with e-cigarettes by politicians. Although by November 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had attributed most cases to contaminated illegal THC cartridges, state governments still stirred up panic and sought emergency bans, which in some cases became permanent.

 

In response to the EVALI outbreak, Massachusetts instituted an emergency ban on all nicotine e-cigarettes starting on September 24, 2019. Rhode Island and Washington followed suit, implementing four-month emergency bans on non-tobacco flavored nicotine e-cigarettes on October 4, 2019, and October 10, 2019, respectively. Massachusetts has since permanently banned the sale of flavored e-cigarette products, including menthol, while Rhode Island and Washington's emergency bans have expired, though a permanent flavor ban remains on the table.

 

Previous research has found similar results to those presented in health value papers.

 

The use of nicotine has not been linked to any diagnosis of EVALI in the field of medicine, but misinformation continues to spread. Under the guidance of sensationalist reporting by policymakers and the media, concerns over the rates of youth vaping have directly sparked fears over deadly vaping products. Misleading information is simple: youth are using e-cigarettes and, in some cases, dying from them. Over two years have passed since the outbreak, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the US have yet to release any formal correction stating that nicotine e-cigarettes are not associated with lung injuries.

 

Previous research has yielded similar results to the findings of a health-focused paper. Co-authors from Boston University published an article in the Harm Reduction Journal indicating that misunderstandings surrounding EVALI (e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury) – which led to a ban in Massachusetts – appeared to have increased cigarette consumption across Boston. Moreover, Dr. Abigail Friedman from Yale University found in JAMA Pediatrics that after San Francisco banned flavored e-cigarettes and tobacco products, high schoolers in the city were more likely to smoke than their peers in other similar districts across the US.

 

(Source: Filter)

 

Restrictions on vaping products may have unintended consequences, including an increase in cigarette sales. While policymakers have focused on limiting access to e-cigarettes, they may inadvertently be pushing consumers back to traditional tobacco products. This is especially problematic given the well-documented health risks associated with smoking. It remains to be seen whether tighter regulations on vaping will have the intended impact of reducing nicotine addiction overall.

 


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.

Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia Liquid Nicotine Returns to Poisons List, Leaving Vape Retail and RM354 Million Tax Collection in Legal Uncertainty
Malaysia’s withdrawal of its appeal in a landmark liquid-nicotine case has left a High Court ruling that struck down the 2023 nicotine exemption in force, bringing liquid and gel nicotine used in vaping products back under the Poisons Act 1952. At the same time, the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 continues to provide a regulatory framework for vaping products, creating uncertainty over retail sales, taxation and existing inventory. MPs are calling for nicotine vape sales and excise collection to stop, including refunds of more than RM354 million collected since 2023, while industry and consumer groups are asking the government to clarify the current legal position.
Sep.04
On-Site Report | CTP Details PMTA Backlog, 180-Day Review Goal and sPMTA Process
On-Site Report | CTP Details PMTA Backlog, 180-Day Review Goal and sPMTA Process
FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products detailed new PMTA review data and process changes at the 2026 FDLI conference. Pending PMTAs fell from about 450,000 at the start of 2025 to 135,000 by September 2026. CTP also discussed its 180-day review goal, current sPMTA pilot, alternate-supplier planning, more than 50,300 pending SE reports, and lessons from the nicotine pouch pilot already being applied to ENDS review.
Regulations
Oct.07
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
2Firsts reviewed the original federal court complaint filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY on Sept. 2 challenging FDA’s 2021 PMTA rule. The lawsuit questions whether FDA’s review process complies with the Tobacco Control Act’s 180-day timeline, even as the agency moves to accelerate PMTA reviews and issues more marketing orders. Drawing on the complaint, FDA records, government audits and recent court rulings, 2Firsts examines the legal arguments, supporting evidence and potential implications for the U.S. tobacco review system.
Regulations
Sep.03
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 Showcases Vuse Pro Flavors and VELO Nicotine Pouches at NACS Show 2026
Reynolds Showcases Vuse Pro Flavors and VELO Nicotine Pouches at NACS Show 2026
Reynolds American, a BAT subsidiary, showcased four Vuse Pro flavored e-cigarette pods and its VELO nicotine pouch portfolio at NACS Show 2026. Booth staff confirmed to 2Firsts that the Vuse Pro flavors are sold in the U.S., although they have not received FDA marketing authorization. BAT outlined plans to expand Vuse retail distribution and reported that VELO held a 30.5% year-to-date volume share of the U.S. modern oral nicotine category through August 2026. The booth also featured the newly launched VELO MAX range and merchandising displays combining cigarettes, vaping products and oral nicotine brands.
EXPO
Oct.09
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23