Several studies making dramatic claims about the dangers of vaping have made headlines in recent years – only to be withdrawn after serious questions were raised about their methods and conclusions.
Here are three notable cases where papers linking vaping to cancer, heart disease and liver problems were later retracted.
1. The cancer link that disappeared
In 2022, a study published in the World Journal of Oncology claimed that people who vaped were more than twice as likely to develop cancer as non-smokers – and even at higher risk than traditional cigarette smokers.
The paper, led by researchers at the University of Illinois, analysed U.S. health survey data and concluded that vape users had an “early age of cancer onset” and “higher risk of cancer.”
But in 2023, the journal issued a retraction. The editors said there were “concerns regarding the article’s methodology, source data processing including statistical analysis, and reliability of conclusions,” and that the authors had failed to justify their findings.
The study was widely shared before being withdrawn, even though experts pointed out major flaws, including not accounting for whether participants had smoked before they vaped, which could have skewed the results.
2. A heart attack claim that didn’t hold up
In 2019, a paper published in the Journal of the American Heart Association claimed that vaping increased the risk of heart attacks. The study, led by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, was picked up by media outlets around the world.
Soon after publication, however, other scientists noticed a critical problem: many of the heart attacks in the dataset had occurred before the people in the study started vaping. That meant the study clearly could not prove vaping was to blame.
After reviewing the issue, the journal formally retracted the paper in early 2020, saying the conclusions were “unreliable.”
3. The liver disease study that was withdrawn
In 2022, another study, this time in the journal Gastroenterology Research, suggested that vaping was linked to chronic liver disease. The research used national U.S. health survey data to compare vape users, smokers and non-smokers, concluding that those who vaped had a higher prevalence of liver problems.
The authors argued that vaping might trigger inflammation that could contribute to liver damage. But statisticians and clinicians soon questioned the paper’s methods, noting that the analysis did not control for prior smoking, alcohol use or obesity, which are all key factors known to affect liver health.
In June 2023, the editors retracted the study, citing “concerns about the article’s methodology, source data processing including statistical analysis, and reliability of conclusions.” The authors did not issue a public response.
Damage done by misinformation
Each of these studies made bold claims about vaping’s health risks that later couldn’t be supported by the evidence. But by the time the retractions appeared, often quietly and months later, the damage was done. The original stories had already made international headlines, while the corrections barely registered.
The fallout can continue long after a paper is withdrawn. Last week, vaping advocate and influencer @GrimmGreen posted that YouTube had removed his video explaining that the cancer study above had been retracted.
“It’s a video about a cancer study getting retracted. It’s literally a scientifically based video using data from @NIH, but @YouTubeCreators feels this science is ‘misinformation’… I’m literally warning people about bad science that was retracted by the authors. How is that misinforming people?”
Even when flawed research is corrected, its impact can persist online, sometimes overshadowing the truth.
These cases show how quickly weak or misleading science can shape public perception and policy before the facts are fully tested. When it comes to studies on vaping, too many headlines make a big noise – then collapse when the science doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
