Young people in a UK study have called for vapes to be positioned as quit-smoking aids, while warning against flavour restrictions that could remove options for adults trying to give up cigarettes.
The participants wanted stronger action on underage sales and youth-oriented marketing. But they also recognised a role for vaping in helping adults stop smoking, proposing that products be supplied through healthcare settings.
Their suggestion raises a question at the centre of vaping policy: how can products used to help smokers quit be presented clearly as quitting aids?
In the UK, consumer vapes cannot be advertised with medicinal claims unless the specific product is authorised for that purpose. That includes claims about helping people stop or reduce smoking, according to Advertising Standards Authority guidance.
The University of Sheffield study, published in Public Health in Practice, explored these issues through workshops with five members of the Sheffield Youth Cabinet, aged 11 to 17. None reported vaping.
The authors concluded: “They opposed flavour restrictions on that basis and proposed that vapes be positioned as cessation products rather than consumer goods.”
A quitting aid with a clearer purpose
Researchers Calum Lewis, Hannah Fairbrother and Duncan Gillespie held two workshops in March 2025, exploring how young people encountered vapes and what they thought about policy proposals.
All five participants attended the first session and three returned for the second. The discussions took place before the UK disposable vape ban, so they describe the market as participants experienced it at that time.
One theme emerged from the young people themselves. This was making vaping’s purpose as a quitting aid more explicit.
Participants suggested that regulating vapes like medical drugs could make young people “realise the seriousness of it”. They discussed health practitioners prescribing vapes to help smokers give up cigarettes, alongside restrictions on general advertising.
The authors described this as “a novel finding”, explaining that participants wanted retail availability restricted and access linked to healthcare settings.
In short, their proposal combined recognition of vaping’s value for smokers with a more controlled system for supplying it.
The rules around quit-smoking claims
The distinction between a consumer vape and a licensed medicine helps explain why the participants’ proposal is significant.
Under UK advertising rules, a vape can be presented as an alternative to tobacco. Claims that it helps people quit or reduce smoking, however, require authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
This restriction applies to commercial product claims. It doesn’t prevent researchers reporting evidence that vaping helps people quit, or health services supporting smokers who choose to use it.
There is also a licensing route for vapes as medicines. The MHRA encourages applications, but products must meet the required standards of quality, safety and effectiveness.
The Sheffield study did not test that licensing system or compare quitting treatments, it explored how young people thought vaping should be presented and controlled.
Protect flavours, tackle marketing
Participants drew a distinction between flavours themselves and the way products were marketed.
They criticised bright colours, “childish names” and shop displays that placed vapes alongside sweets and other everyday purchases. One participant supported “banning things like the names of vapes because… names are probably bigger than watching a commercial”.
However, they opposed a flavour ban because they saw flavours as useful to adults trying to stop smoking. One described such a restriction as “taking away the only good thing vapes have”.
The authors wrote: “Restrictions on how vapes are marketed and sold could reduce their appeal to young people without closing off their use for smoking cessation, which is the balance participants proposed themselves.”
Shops and social networks
The workshops also highlighted how participants believed young people were getting hold of vapes despite age restrictions.
Local convenience shops were described as easier places to buy them than supermarkets or specialist vape shops, where participants perceived stricter checks.
One participant said: “most shops just don’t care. They’ll sell them to young children”. Another described it as “easier to buy vapes than candy sometimes”.
Participants supported retailer licensing, restrictions on sales near schools and penalties for selling to underage customers. They also described supplies coming through older friends and siblings, social media and shared devices.
Cheap prices and products that were easy to conceal added to that access. The researchers’ conclusion was that these influences overlapped, making a single policy unlikely to address them all.
Healthcare access has trade-offs too
Although participants favoured a healthcare-based approach, the authors acknowledged potential drawbacks.
They pointed to earlier research in which adults saw medical approaches as reassuring but worried that restricting supply could narrow the product choices that helped them switch from cigarettes.
The paper also noted that UK policy already promotes vaping for quitting through programmes such as Swap to Stop, while retaining wider retail access.
This was a small qualitative study, designed to explore ideas in depth. Youth Cabinet members may be more engaged with policy than their peers, and none could speak from personal experience of vaping.
It provides no basis for claiming that all young people oppose flavour bans or favour prescriptions, but what it does show is that these participants considered adult smokers’ needs alongside concerns about youth access.
The authors said: “These participants recognised the same trade-off policy is trying to resolve, between restricting a consumer market and preserving a route out of smoking.”