The Call to Ban Flavored E-cigarettes for Youth

Jul.20.2022
The Call to Ban Flavored E-cigarettes for Youth
Calls for banning flavored e-cigarettes, especially for youth, due to concerns about rising usage and appeal to minors.

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the number of people using electronic cigarettes. While they were once considered a safer alternative to traditional cigarettes, some are now calling for a ban on flavored e-cigarettes, especially among young people. E-cigarettes were previously used as a way to quit smoking, but they also have their unique set of problems.


According to reports, the Irish Heart Foundation (IHF) has lent support to calls for a smoking ban. The Independent newspaper notes that the IHF wants flavored e-cigarettes banned, in an effort to make them less attractive to young people.


Mark Murphy, the spokesperson for IHF, stated that electronic cigarette manufacturers use flavorings with thousands of different options to attract minors.


A study has revealed that third and fourth-grade students believe that the marketing and packaging of e-cigarettes are highly appealing to young people and children.


The Oireachtas is proposing to scrap the brightly colored packaging associated with e-cigarettes and instead introduce plain packaging. They are also seeking to ban e-cigarette advertising on social media platforms. Finally, they are considering raising the minimum age for purchasing e-cigarettes from 18 to 21 years old.


According to the Independent, research by HSE has shown that 71% of people support a ban on the sale of tobacco to those under the age of 21.


I'm sorry, but I would need a specific sentence or paragraph to be able to provide a translation to standard journalistic English.



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.

FDA Revises Import Alert 98-07 Rules, Bringing May Enforcement Priorities Into Unauthorized ENDS Detentions
FDA Revises Import Alert 98-07 Rules, Bringing May Enforcement Priorities Into Unauthorized ENDS Detentions
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has revised the rules under Import Alert 98-07 to incorporate its May 2026 enforcement-priority policy for certain electronic nicotine delivery systems marketed without premarket authorization. The alert continues to allow detention without physical examination, or DWPE, for ENDS lacking required marketing authorization, while directing field divisions to apply the May risk-based framework. When necessary, detention or refusal decisions must also undergo review by the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products. Products including PACHA and Vuse Pro have already emerged as industry examples of the May policy, although enforcement discretion does not constitute FDA marketing authorization.
News
Sep.28 by 2Firsts Perspectives
SMOORE’s DOJO by VAPORESSO to Launch New Global Brand Identity on September 1
SMOORE’s DOJO by VAPORESSO to Launch New Global Brand Identity on September 1
According to recent LinkedIn posts from people at VAPORESSO, SMOORE and a German distribution partner, vape brand DOJO will begin rolling out a new global brand identity on September 1, 2026, led by a redesigned handwritten logo. The new visual system will be gradually applied across product packaging, marketing materials and digital assets over the following months. Fabio Corsaro, Head of Marketing and Purchasing at MG Wesel GmbH, said the rebrand was related to trademark issues, but that explanation has not been publicly confirmed by DOJO, VAPORESSO or SMOORE. DOJO is currently promoting its Blast X product in Germany.
Aug.31
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
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
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company has asked a federal court in Washington to declare that it has no duty to defend or indemnify vape distributor i5 Distribution in a product liability case involving an Elf Bar BC5000. The plaintiff alleges that the disposable vape caught fire and exploded in his pocket, causing severe burns and ultimately requiring an above-the-knee amputation of his left leg. MUSIC is relying on a tobacco, nicotine or nicotine replacement products exclusion and a premises limitation endorsement. The court has not ruled on the coverage dispute.
News
Sep.10
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