- New Canadian study finds cigarette sales rose after vape flavour restrictions
- Research suggests smokers substitute cigarettes when flavoured vapes are removed
- Similar effects previously observed in the United States
- Findings raise questions for policymakers considering flavour bans
Restrictions on flavoured vapes have been linked to increases in cigarette sales, according to a growing body of economic and public health research, including a new large-scale study from Canada.
The findings add to existing evidence suggesting that when flavoured vapes are removed from the market, some consumers do not quit nicotine use but instead return to combustible cigarettes.
While flavour bans are typically introduced to reduce youth vaping, researchers say the wider effects on smoking behaviour should be considered.
New evidence from Canada
The latest study, released in November by economists Brad Davis, Abigail Friedman and Michael Pesko, analysed the effects of provincial flavour restrictions on nicotine vaping products in Canada between 2018 and 2023.
Using retail vaping sales data, wholesale cigarette shipment data and Google search trends, the researchers compared provinces that adopted flavour restrictions with those that did not.
They found that flavoured vaping product sales fell sharply following the introduction of restrictions. Over the same period, cigarette sales increased by approximately 9.6 per cent in adopting provinces, with some estimates showing increases of more than 20 per cent.
Canada is considered a stringent tobacco regulatory environment, with plain packaging laws, a national ban on menthol cigarettes and a cap on nicotine concentrations in vaping products. The authors note that this makes Canada an important test case for whether flavour restrictions can reduce vaping without increasing smoking.
The study concludes that “patterns of substitution between e-cigarettes and cigarettes are generalisable across countries with different tobacco regulatory strengths”.
Substitution rather than cessation
The Canadian findings are consistent with earlier research indicating that cigarettes and vaping products often function as substitutes.
In economic terms, when one product becomes less accessible or less attractive, demand can shift to an alternative rather than disappearing altogether.
The Canadian study found limited evidence that consumers replaced flavoured vaping products with unflavoured alternatives or sought them through vape shops or online sources. Google search data showed a decline in searches related to vaping purchases following flavour restrictions.
Instead, the increase in cigarette sales suggests that some former vapers returned to smoking.
Evidence from earlier studies
While European data on flavour bans remain limited, similar substitution effects have been documented elsewhere.
In a 2024 study published in JAMA Health Forum, Friedman, Pesko and colleagues examined state-level flavour restrictions in the U.S. and found that daily vaping fell among young adults, while daily cigarette smoking increased.
Retail sales data have produced comparable results. A paper published online in the American Journal of Health Economics found that U.S. flavour restrictions reduced flavoured vape sales but increased cigarette purchases, particularly of non-menthol cigarettes.
Other vaping-related policies appear to produce similar outcomes. Research on vape taxation has found that higher taxes reduce vaping while increasing cigarette use, indicating substitution rather than cessation.
Although these studies are based in North America, the Canadian findings suggest the underlying behavioural response may not be country-specific.
Implications for smoking trends
Cigarette smoking rates have been declining across many high-income countries, including Canada, the U.S. and much of Europe.
The concern raised by researchers is not that flavour bans cause sudden increases in smoking prevalence, but that they may slow or partially reverse existing downward trends.
In the Canadian study, cigarette sales fell more slowly in provinces that adopted flavour restrictions than in those that did not. In several post-policy periods, cigarette sales were higher in adopting provinces than in non-adopting ones.
The authors note that cigarette sales are not a direct measure of smoking prevalence, but argue that sustained increases in sales are unlikely to occur without changes in smoking behaviour.
Youth protection and unintended effects
Flavour bans are often justified as a way to reduce youth vaping.
However, several studies have found that the strongest substitution effects occur among young adults – a group that overlaps with recent smokers and recent quitters.
Researchers caution that if flavour restrictions reduce vaping while increasing smoking among this group, the overall public health impact becomes more complex.
Cigarettes remain substantially more harmful than vapes, with higher risks of cancer, cardiovascular disease and premature mortality.
Questions for policymakers
The research does not suggest that vaping is harmless, or that it should be left unregulated. What it does show is that policies aimed at vaping can have knock-on effects on smoking.
The Canadian findings add to evidence that banning flavours may reduce access to lower-risk alternatives without reducing demand for nicotine. For some users, that appears to mean a return to cigarettes.
As more countries weigh up flavour bans, researchers say it is important to consider not just whether vaping falls, but what people do instead.
ends
