UKVIA welcomes first e-cigarette evidence review by OHID

Oct.05.2022
UKVIA welcomes first e-cigarette evidence review by OHID
The UKVIA welcomed the first evidence review on e-cigarettes by OHID, highlighting their potential in improving public health.

The UK Vaping Industry Association (UKVIA) has welcomed the first evidence review of e-cigarettes released by the Office of Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) with regards to health benefits and differences.


John Dunn (pictured: UKVIA)


The latest review on e-cigarettes builds upon evidence collected by its predecessor, the Public Health England (PHE), and further emphasizes the role that e-cigarettes can play in improving public health.


We are pleased to see that the experts participating in this latest review continue to estimate that the harm from e-cigarettes is at least 95% lower than combustible tobacco and that it 'only represents a small fraction of smoking risk,' " said John Dunne, CEO of UKVIA in a statement. "This figure was first disclosed in 2015 by the then PHE in what was described as a milestone review, and behind this statistical data, statements regarding the significantly lower harm of vaping compared to smoking continue to be cited by health organizations in the UK today.


Duncan Selbie stated, "evidence shows that the relative exposure to electronic cigarettes is significantly lower compared to smoking, and these biomarkers are linked to risks of cancer, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and other health conditions that cause several thousands of deaths every year." "Our own youth prevention task force is working tirelessly with trade standards, retailers, and brand owners to prevent youth access to electronic cigarettes. We have recently presented recommendations to the Department of Health and Social Care aimed at reducing the sales of electronic cigarettes to minors from the source. These include introducing a retailer licensing or approved retailer and distributor scheme; imposing fines of at least £10,000 per transaction for traders who disregard UK law; and introducing a national testing and procurement program to ensure all retail businesses meet high standards in preventing youth access to electronic cigarettes.


Statement:


This article is compiled from third-party information and is intended for industry communication and learning purposes only.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of its contents. The translation of this article is solely for the purpose of industry exchange and research.


Due to limitations in the level of translation expertise, the translated article may not fully convey the original meaning. Therefore, please refer to the original article for accuracy.


2FIRSTS maintains full alignment with the Chinese government on any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and foreign-related statements and positions.


The copyright of the compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us to remove it.



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.

Australian Coalition Unveils Illicit Tobacco Plan With 80% Excise Cut and Legal, Taxed Vapes and Nicotine Pouches
Australian Coalition Unveils Illicit Tobacco Plan With 80% Excise Cut and Legal, Taxed Vapes and Nicotine Pouches
Australia’s Coalition has unveiled a national illicit-tobacco policy that would cut tobacco excise by 80% and create legal, regulated and taxed adult markets for vaping products and nicotine pouches if it wins government. The plan proposes an excise of A$0.50 per millilitre of e-liquid and A$0.025 per milligram of nicotine in pouches, alongside A$200 million in additional enforcement and a A$60 million three-year public-awareness campaign. The Coalition says the package would narrow the price advantage of illicit products and undermine organised crime, while Labor and public-health groups warn that dramatically cheaper cigarettes could reverse long-term declines in smoking.
Sep.03
Kumulus Vape2026 H1 Revenue Falls 8.3% but Profit Rises 24% as B2B Weakens and Consumer Channels Grow
Kumulus Vape2026 H1 Revenue Falls 8.3% but Profit Rises 24% as B2B Weakens and Consumer Channels Grow
French vaping company Kumulus Vape reported first-half 2026 revenue of €25.5 million, down 8.3% year over year, as its core B2B distribution business fell 11% to €21.6 million. B2C and store-network revenue rose 5.6% and 17.8%, respectively. Commercial margin increased to 26.3% from 21.7%, while net profit rose 24.1% to €0.8 million. The company attributed the profitability improvement to catalog optimization, logistics restructuring and the ramp-up of Labster, its in-house production unit for proprietary brands.
Market
Sep.17 by 2Firsts Perspectives
South Korea Vape Strategies Diverge as BAT Reconsiders Exit and PMI Takes VEEV to About 14,000 Stores
South Korea Vape Strategies Diverge as BAT Reconsiders Exit and PMI Takes VEEV to About 14,000 Stores
BAT Rothmans says it previously considered exiting South Korea's vaping market because of competitive pressure from unregulated products, but is now reassessing conditions following changes to the country's nicotine regulatory framework. Vuse and other BAT vaping products remain available through existing distribution channels. The statement followed a South Korean media report that interpreted BAT's broader withdrawal from selected Vapour markets as a full exit from South Korea. Meanwhile, Philip Morris International launched VEEV inPRIME in the country in June and began expanding distribution to around 14,000 convenience stores and other retail channels in July. The contrasting moves highlight differing investment strategies as South Korea's regulated vaping market evolves.
Aug.14
UK Vape Duty Starts in October as Hayati, DOJO and Others Launch Lower-Capacity Products With Lower Per-Unit Tax
UK Vape Duty Starts in October as Hayati, DOJO and Others Launch Lower-Capacity Products With Lower Per-Unit Tax
The UK's Vaping Products Duty will take effect on October 1, 2026, at a flat rate of £2.20 per 10ml of vaping liquid. Ahead of implementation, DOJO, PIXL and Hayati have introduced or been reported to be adding lower-capacity tiers alongside larger products. DOJO has added a 6ml BLAST7K Fresh below its 10ml BLAST10K Fresh, PIXL offers both a 12ml 8000 and a 6ml 5K, while retailer Ninja Vapes says Hayati is preparing a 7ml 4K alongside its existing 12ml 6K. The pattern points to a growing lower-capacity tier in the UK market, although the brands have not all explicitly linked the changes to the new duty.
Sep.23
BREAKING | China’s Tobacco Regulator Summons iMiracle Over Suspected Compliance Breaches
BREAKING | China’s Tobacco Regulator Summons iMiracle Over Suspected Compliance Breaches
Based on public records reviewed by 2Firsts, this is the first time China’s State Tobacco Monopoly Administration has publicly announced regulatory talks with an e-cigarette company.
Jul.29
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