8 March 2025
Vaping epidemic grips Western Australia, sparking urgent action
A new generation of addiction has emerged in Western Australia, with thousands of young people falling victim to the allure of vaping.
One of those youngsters is 22-year-old Caileen Paynter, whose experience serves as a cautionary tale, highlighting the insidious nature of vaping and its profound impact on both health and financial wellbeing.
"I was attached to the hip with my vape, take it in the car, sleep with it, I would get up to in the night," she said.
​
Rachael Clifford & Ashley Ried Are Wrong & Here Is why:
​
Critical Review of the Article: "Vaping epidemic grips Western Australia, sparking urgent action" by Rachael Clifford and comments by Ashley Reid
​
This article highlights concerns about vaping in Western Australia, particularly focusing on youth uptake, addiction, and perceived risks. While these concerns are valid, the narrative and arguments presented lack balance and fail to reflect the broader scientific evidence on vaping, particularly its role in harm reduction and smoking cessation.
​
Key Issues with the Article's Claims
​
1. Exaggeration of a "Vaping Epidemic"
The article characterizes vaping as an "epidemic" gripping Western Australia. While youth experimentation with vaping has increased, describing it as an "epidemic" is both alarmist and misleading. According to evidence from the UK and Australia:
Youth vaping is predominantly experimental and infrequent. Regular vaping among never-smokers remains uncommon​.
Studies show that most youth who vape are either current or former smokers, indicating that vaping is often replacing smoking rather than introducing non-smokers to nicotine addiction​.
​
2. Overstated Claims of Vaping Addiction
The personal story of Caileen Paynter describes intense dependency on vaping. While some vapers may develop habitual use, nicotine addiction through vaping is generally less severe than cigarette addiction. Research indicates:
Nicotine dependence from vaping is lower than from smoking. The speed and intensity of nicotine delivery in cigarettes is much higher, making cigarettes significantly more addictive​.
For many smokers, vaping is a highly effective quitting aid, often succeeding where other methods have failed​​.
​
While addiction concerns are legitimate, this should be contextualized against the far greater risk of smoking.
​
3. Misrepresentation of Vaping’s Health Risks
The article implies severe health risks from vaping without acknowledging the substantial evidence that vaping is far less harmful than smoking:
The NHS and Public Health England have consistently stated that vaping carries only a small fraction of the risks of smoking​.
The Royal College of Physicians concludes that the long-term risks of vaping are unlikely to exceed 5% of the harm caused by smoking​.
While vaping is not risk-free, portraying it as a serious public health threat distorts the established scientific consensus.
​
4. Fear of Rising Teen Smoking Rates
Ashley Reid’s concern that vaping may lead to increased youth smoking is unfounded based on current evidence:
Studies consistently show that vaping is not a gateway to smoking. Rather, vaping is largely displacing youth smoking, contributing to falling smoking rates in populations where vaping is widely available​.
Data from countries like the UK demonstrate that youth smoking rates have continued to decline despite rising vaping rates​.
​
Claims that vaping will reverse hard-won public health gains are speculative and unsupported by robust evidence.
5. Misplaced Focus on Pharmacy-Only Access
The article highlights the failure of Australia’s prescription-only model for vaping, yet does not acknowledge the unintended consequences of this approach:
Australia’s strict regulations have inadvertently fueled a thriving black market for vaping products, which is dominated by unregulated and potentially dangerous products​.
In contrast, countries like New Zealand and the UK, which allow regulated retail access to vapes, have seen safer product markets and better success in helping smokers quit​.
Restricting vaping to pharmacies fails to meet the demand of adult smokers seeking safer alternatives to cigarettes and has proven ineffective in controlling youth access.
Instead of sensationalizing vaping, a more effective strategy would involve:
✅ Providing accurate information about vaping’s relative risks compared to smoking.
✅ Regulating vaping products to ensure quality control and reduce the black market.
✅ Educating young people about the risks of vaping while promoting vaping as a harm reduction tool for adult smokers.
✅ Making regulated vaping products available to adult smokers as a safer alternative to combustible tobacco.
​
The Cancer Council’s approach risks undermining tobacco harm reduction efforts. Overstating the risks of vaping while ignoring its benefits as a quitting aid could discourage smokers from switching to a significantly less harmful alternative. A balanced, evidence-based approach—one that promotes vaping as a smoking cessation tool while limiting youth access—is the most effective public health strategy.