Two Stories, One Country: The Deep Divide Between Cancer Council and Roy Morgan on Youth Smoking and Vaping

Alan Gore 16 July 2025

In 2025, two major public health reports are painting starkly different pictures of where things stand and who we should believe is now a serious public debate.

On one side: The Cancer Council’s “Generation Vape” report, released with media fanfare and hailed by Health Minister Mark Butler as proof that Australia has “turned a corner” in youth vaping.

On the other hand, Roy Morgan Research quietly released (then partially deleted and edited) data showing a disturbing surge in both smoking and vaping among young Australians.

Let’s examine the inconsistencies and what they reveal.

Inconsistency #1: Are Youth Vaping Rates Falling or Rising?

Cancer Council (Generation Vape, July 2025):

• Vaping among 14–17-year-olds has decreased from 17.5% to 14.6% between early 2023 and April 2025.

• Reports a decline in interest, curiosity, and social acceptability of vaping.

• Suggests new laws restricting access are “working” and contributing to a positive trend.

Roy Morgan (July 1, 2025 Report):

• Vaping among 18–24-year-olds rose from 19% in September 2024 to 20.5% by June 2025.

• Overall nicotine use (smoking or vaping) in this group jumped to 27.8% — up from 20.7% a decade ago.

• Youth smoking (FMC, RYO, and illicit tobacco) is also increasing, not declining.

Who’s right?

Both can’t be. The Cancer Council says youth vaping is declining due to effective laws. Roy Morgan’s figures suggest vaping continues to increase, and smoking is rising with it. Age groups may differ (14–17 vs. 18–24), but the conflicting trends can’t simply be explained away by methodology alone.

Inconsistency #2: Is Smoking on the Rise Again?

Cancer Council:

• Cites that smoking is at “historic lows” among young people, with no urgency to mention any new upward trend.

• Emphasises vaping bans as a preventive for future smoking uptake.

Roy Morgan:

• Shows a marked increase in youth smoking rates, especially among young adults aged 18–24.

• Factory-made Made Cigarette use rose by nearly 3 percentage points in under a year.

• Illicit tobacco use has more than doubled since 2020 — 9.1% of 18–24-year-olds now report using it.

Why this matters:

If Roy Morgan’s data is accurate and it uses a nationally representative methodology, then Australia may be seeing a resurgence in youth smoking, a reversal of decades of progress and exactly what the vaping crackdown aimed to prevent.

Inconsistency #3: Methodology, Transparency & Credibility

Cancer Council:

• Offers topline figures and positive framing, but limited raw data.

• Based on self-report surveys, often school-based, focused on under-18s.

• Widely circulated in media, supported by government messaging.

Roy Morgan:

• Uses long-term trend data from ~5,000 young people and ~60,000 adults annually.

• First report (Finding No. 9936) was removed shortly after release, then reposted with key smoking figures missing.

• Roy Morgan has never publicly explained why the original report was edited or who requested the changes.

The problem:

Transparency. If independent research is altered under pressure, or inconvenient data is quietly removed from public view, it threatens not only trust in the research institution, but also the entire public health conversation.

The Timing: A Coincidence Too Convenient?

It’s worth noting that the Cancer Council’s “Generation Vape” report and Roy Morgan’s updated smoking/vaping figures were both released within days of each other in July 2025, just as Australia’s final stage of pharmacy-only vape restrictions came into effect.

That coincidence alone raises eyebrows.

The Cancer Council’s report was quickly picked up by media outlets, with upbeat headlines and Minister Butler’s public endorsement. The message was clear: the reforms are working, youth vaping is declining, and public support is paying off.

Meanwhile, Roy Morgan’s report told a very different story, one in which young people are still vaping at high rates and are now smoking more, especially using illicit tobacco. But instead of being promoted, it was quietly revised and stripped of key smoking data.

This highlights how powerful timing can be in shaping public narratives. When one report is amplified and the other buried, the public hears only part of the story.

What Should We Believe?

• The Cancer Council says vaping rates are falling, reforms are effective, and teens are turning away from nicotine.

• Roy Morgan says the opposite: youth nicotine use is climbing, illicit tobacco is rising, and smoking is coming back.

Both can’t be right.

We need a transparent, independent review of all available data — free from political pressure or institutional bias — so we can understand what’s really happening among Australia’s youth.

Instead of accountability, we get spin.

Butler boasts of seizing 10 million illicit vapes without acknowledging that this number reflects policy failure. Demand hasn’t dropped. It’s just gone underground, feeding organised crime and putting youth at risk of even less regulated products.

His narrative? The policy is working.

The data? It says otherwise.

The government is betting that tough rhetoric and seizures will look like action. But real public health policy demands outcomes, not optics.

• If more young people are turning to cigarettes…

• If nicotine use is higher than a decade ago…

• If black market profits are booming…

Then it’s time to admit: this isn’t progress. It’s a crisis dressed up as success.

Final Thoughts: Truth Before Policy

Australia has a choice. It can continue crafting public health policy around spin, selective data, and convenient narratives, or it can face reality.

Youth nicotine use is still a serious issue. But if young Australians are turning to black market vapes and cigarettes, that’s not a win; that’s policy failure. And if government-backed data is promoted while independent data is edited and downplayed, we’re not serving the truth — we’re serving politics.

The Roy Morgan saga should not be swept under the rug. It should be investigated.

Because when the public can’t trust the data, they stop trusting the policies built on it.