What The Media Say
This page analyses what is said about Australian vaping and tobacco harm reduction in the media including what may be published in journals and by influencers. This will help to hold the media acountable to report accurately and sensibly.
For all firebombing reports go here>>
Total Articles:
2025 Media Sentiment
Positive (20)
Neutral (21)
Negative (16)
2025
April
Potentially deadly synthetic opioids have been found in vape liquid, as criminals make new varieties to evade detection.
Nitazenes are made in a laboratory and are considered up to 10 times stronger than fentanyl, which has caused an unprecedented number of deaths in North America.
About 29 million cigarettes were seized in Queensland between July 2023 and December 2024.
Across Australia, about 1784 tonnes of tobacco – equivalent to about two billion cigarettes – was seized by border forces last financial year.
That equates to about $3 billion in unpaid taxes.
Internal reports estimate smoking costs Queensland about $27.4 billion through strain on the healthcare system, loss of productivity and other costs.
The Gold Coast's public health unit has raided stores on the tourist strip, seizing vapes and tobacco.
Raids were carried out on stores at Southport, Mermaid Beach, Broadbeach and Nobby Beach, leading to the closure of five tobacconists.
Tobacco excise revenue has tanked amid a booming black market
It's a diabolical problem for the government, whose public health policy has long relied on increasing tobacco excise duty as its primary tool to reduce smoking.
by Dr Fei Gao and Professor Andrew Terry
New data suggests adolescent vaping is at its lowest since records began. Unlike the UK and Canada, Australia restricts vape sales, requiring prescriptions for under-18s.
by 7 Sunrise
Small businesses say cigarette sales have dropped sharply as illegal tobacco booms.
The decline has also indirectly impacted the sales of other products.
New laws come into effect in Australia today that change the look, ingredients, and packaging of tobacco products.
The Australian government passed the package of tobacco laws in late 2023, which include:
-
standardised tobacco pack and cigarette stick sizes, no more novelty pack sizes or cigarette lengths
-
updated and improved graphic health warnings and quitting advice inserts within all tobacco packs
-
warnings printed directly on cigarettes
-
banning ingredients that make tobacco taste better and easier to smoke, including menthol.
-
Australia will become the second country in the world after Canada to print grim warnings on every single cigarette.
The move is one of a raft of new laws surrounding smoking and vaping starting today.
Cancer Council and Quit backed the move, saying the phrases convey the dangers of the habit "in a manner that cannot be avoided".
March
"Exposing the criminal syndicates fighting for control of Australia’s $5 billion illegal tobacco trade."
"they refuse to admit that their policies are directly responsible for the breakout in violence, stating that the solution to crippling Australia’s tobacco black market is to increase law enforcement and impose stiffer penalties, with Health Minister Mark Butler saying, “Increasing the price of cigarettes right across the world is recognised as one of the most important tobacco control measures.” They just don’t seem to get it."
"Tobacco excise collections sank to a nine-year low of $9.7 billion last financial year as smokers turn to the black market for cheaper cigarettes, costing the three wholesalers market share. Tobacco excise is supposed to deter Australians from smoking, which causes cancer."
"he black market for tobacco has flourished in the shadow of Australia’s aggressive tax policy, creating a lucrative opportunity for organised crime. As legal tobacco prices have soared, criminal networks have profited by undercutting legal products, offering smokers a cheaper alternative that circumvents regulation and taxation. This underground economy has expanded dramatically in recent years, fuelling criminal turf wars and undercutting tax revenues.
by Edward Jegasothy
"The state government has come under fire after leaving local councils to enforce the new tobacco licence scheme, with officers fearing they could be “targeted” if they manage the raging illegal activity."
"There’s a giant, multi-billion dollar black hole in the budget, and it’s all down to unintended consequences that successive governments refused to admit were happening."
"What's happening now is we've had the illicit tobacco market has stepped in and taken advantage of the fact that we have high tobacco taxes, but we haven't had the corresponding enforcement to shut those illicit sellers down."
The Federal Government says increasing law enforcement spending will help the Budget's tax revenue hole, created by increasing black market tobacco sales.
However, experts believe the tax excise has risen so much, it's forced people to turn to the illegal trade.
Australia's booming illegal cigarette trade has burned a $6.9 billion hole in the federal budget and continues to fuel organised crime
But despite ongoing calls to freeze any further increase to tobacco excise to combat the black market, the Treasurer has ruled out that option.
Producers: Lexie Jeuniewic and Brooke Young - ABC
Secret intelligence briefings repeatedly warned state and federal agencies that the illicit tobacco business was undermining border security as it expanded under the control of dangerous organised crime bosses.
by Nick McKenzie, Serge Negus and Chris Vedelago - SMH
Four Corners investigative journalist Dan Oakes uncovers the secrets of Australia’s black-market tobacco trade in Tobacco Wars. With illicit cigarettes readily available in cash-only stores and distributed by unmarked vans across the country, this investigation reveals a vast network stretching from Melbourne’s suburban tobacconists to international smuggling routes. Using concealed cameras and exclusive access to law enforcement, the Four Corners team follows the illicit pipeline, exposing the lucrative industry that is fueling organised crime while robbing the government of billions in lost revenue. Tobacco Wars investigates the high-stakes underworld where arson attacks, extortion, and deadly feuds are used to control the illegal cigarette market. As the government grapples with policy responses and law enforcement agencies struggle to disrupt smuggling syndicates, Tobacco Wars raises urgent questions about the country’s ability to curb this thriving illicit trade. With gripping undercover footage and exclusive insights from key players, Four Corners delivers a must-watch exposé on how Australia’s efforts to cut smoking rates have inadvertently fueled a dangerous and violent underworld.
CHAPTERS 00:00
Tracking tobacco 02:05
The black market 05:55
Criminal gangs 06:15
Innocent victims 08:15
Arson attacks 09:05
The Haddara family 11:10
Dubai 12:45
Khaled al-Mahamid 14:25
Australian Border Force 24:10
Public policy 26:50
Pam’s story 31:50
Tobacco control policies 31:55
Crackdowns and raids 39:00
What can be done?
Ms Hughes told the court Haddara got into the smoke store business with 'family members' in a bid to bounce back financially.
Haddara, of Hoppers Crossing in Melbourne's west, now works as a car salesman in Werribee.
He was a relatively unknown figure in Melbourne's underworld until the tobacco store bust.
In a shock move, Ms Hughes pleaded with the court to spare Haddara a conviction so he could keep his gun licence.
'Mr Haddara engages in recreational shooting with his father,' Ms Hughes said.
However Haddara was convicted and fined $3500.
The tax office and Border Force’s joint illicit tobacco team has, between mid-2018 and mid-2024, found and destroyed 253 hectares of tobacco crops and 21.8 million illegal cigarettes.
“By overly restricting the sale of legal, regulated nicotine, consumers have had little choice but to turn to the black market,” Martin said.
“This has led to disastrous, sometimes fatal consequences, including more than 200 arson attacks around the country as a result of rival organised crime groups fighting for control of the market.”
The tobacco wars just shot a $6.9bn hole in the federal budget. A wave of crime in otherwise quiet suburbs has now become a structural drag on the nation’s finances.
The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, admits there’s “a very serious problem” that must be addressed. But there’s disagreement about how to best solve it. And until that happens, major healthcare policies – including those that deal with the damage caused by tobacco – become harder to pay for.
Huge losses in government revenue from tobacco tax are expected, as smokers increasingly look to cheaper products found on the black market.
by ABC
Victoria Police is having to lease several warehouses to store more than a million vapes it has seized in the past two years.
And when it receives a court order to green light destroying the evidence, the force will have to spend more than $750,000 from its budget to do so.
by Jon Kaila - Herald Sun
There are reports of pop-up stores appearing in Tasmania selling illicit tobacco.
A caller in the north west of Tasmania tells Leon Compton on ABC Tasmania Mornings that he "can't blame" those buying from illegal sellers since they sell it cheaper.
The director of Quit Tasmania, Abby Smith, says controlling the tobacco industry is primarily an enforcement problem, not a tax problem.
“There’s lots of evidence over many years to show that price and taxes is one of the best ways to encourage people to quit,” Ms Smith said.
Abby Smith Is Extremely Wrong & Here Is why:
-
Price Increases Drive Black Market Growth
While raising cigarette prices can reduce smoking rates to some extent, excessive taxation without accessible alternatives can inadvertently fuel a booming illicit market. This has been evident in Australia, where stringent vaping regulations combined with high cigarette prices have led to a significant rise in the black market for both illicit tobacco and vapes. -
Enforcement Alone Is Insufficient
Strict enforcement measures can only address part of the issue. Without providing safer alternatives like regulated vaping products, demand for illicit products persists, especially among disadvantaged groups and those who struggle to quit smoking using traditional methods.
What Works Better: A Balanced Approach
Evidence shows that regulated, affordable access to safer alternatives like vaping products is crucial. Vaping has proven to be one of the most effective smoking cessation tools available and is substantially less harmful than smoking.
The best public health strategy is a combination of:
-
Providing accessible, regulated nicotine vaping products as a safer alternative.
-
Strict enforcement against the black market, combined with education campaigns promoting harm reduction.
-
Despite claims from the global tobacco industry that vaping can help people cut back on cigarettes, new research from the U-S has found it actually could be making it harder for smokers to quit.
A study from the University of California San Diego looked at over 6,000 smokers across the United States, and found vaping prolongs both smoking and nicotine dependence.
John Pierce, Professor at the School of Public Health, U-C San Diego Is Extremely Wrong & Here Is why:
Claim 1: Vaping prolongs both smoking and nicotine dependence.
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
The claim that vaping prolongs smoking contradicts substantial evidence that vaping is one of the most effective smoking cessation tools available. Studies show that vaping helps smokers reduce or quit smoking altogether. The Public Health England (now OHID) 2022 report found that vaping is the most popular method for quitting smoking in England and has contributed to declining smoking rates.
-
The NHS clearly states that “Nicotine vaping is substantially less harmful than smoking and is one of the most effective tools for quitting smoking”.
-
While some dual-use cases exist (where individuals vape and smoke simultaneously), this is often a transition phase before full cessation. Evidence shows that complete switching to vaping drastically reduces toxin exposure and harm compared to smoking.
Claim 2: Vaping is less effective than quitting cold turkey or using other NRT products.
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
This statement contradicts strong evidence supporting vaping’s effectiveness as a quitting aid. According to the NHS, “Nicotine vapes are one of the most effective stop smoking aids”.
-
A comprehensive evidence review led by Dr Colin Mendelsohn concluded that vaping is at least as effective, if not more so, than nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) in helping people quit smoking.
-
The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) 2022 report found that vaping was associated with higher quit rates than traditional NRT methods.
-
Cold turkey quitting has a notoriously low success rate. Evidence suggests that vaping provides a practical alternative for smokers who have repeatedly failed with other methods.
Claim 3: Vaping maintains addiction.
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
While nicotine is addictive, evidence shows that vaping is generally less dependence-forming than smoking. The Royal College of Physicians states that nicotine in vaping is relatively benign in the doses used in e-cigarettes.
-
Vaping users tend to reduce nicotine strength over time, often leading to cessation or very low dependence levels. Additionally, for people unable to quit using other methods, maintaining a reduced-risk form of nicotine use through vaping is preferable to continued smoking.
Claim 4: Vaping has only been widespread for 5-6 years.
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
This statement is misleading. Vaping has been commercially available since the mid-2000s, with widespread use increasing significantly around 2010-2012 in various parts of the world. Evidence on vaping's relative safety, efficacy, and patterns of use has been studied extensively for over a decade.
Claim 5: Most vapers are young people.
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
This is a common misconception. Studies consistently show that most adult vapers are current or former smokers using vaping as a harm reduction tool or cessation aid.
-
According to Cancer Research UK, regular vaping among never-smokers remains uncommon.
-
The ASH Youth Survey confirms that youth vaping is more likely experimental and infrequent, with regular vaping being rare among non-smokers.
-
The NHS emphasizes that vaping is not for children or non-smokers, but when used appropriately by smokers, it is highly effective in reducing harm.
Claim 6: Nicotine vaping caused EVALI (E-cigarette or Vaping Product Use-Associated Lung Injury).
Fact Check & Rebuttal:
-
This claim is incorrect. EVALI was linked to illicit THC cartridges contaminated with vitamin E acetate — not legal nicotine vaping products. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed this in their investigation of the EVALI outbreak.
-
Nicotine e-liquids sold legally under UK and EU standards are tightly regulated for safety and do not contain vitamin E acetate.
Conclusion:
While Professor John Pierce raises some concerns, much of his argument is inconsistent with the broader evidence base. Vaping is a significantly less harmful alternative to smoking, and the best available evidence supports its role as an effective smoking cessation tool for adult smokers. Misconceptions like EVALI being caused by nicotine vaping and exaggerated claims about youth vaping misinform the public and undermine effective tobacco harm reduction strategies.
-
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.
By framing vaping as an “epidemic,” the article risks stoking public fear rather than encouraging evidence-based understanding.
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.
Balanced Recommendations for Public Health Policy
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.
-
"30 per cent reduction in vaping by the youngest people, a 50 per cent reduction in vaping among people over the age of 30. But these illegal cigarettes are just proving very, very hard to stamp out."
Mark Butler Is Wrong On Many Levels, and here is why:
Mark Butler's interview reveals several key issues in Australia's current approach to vaping and illicit tobacco enforcement. While there are legitimate concerns about youth vaping and criminal activity linked to tobacco smuggling, Butler's comments reflect a problematic public health strategy that risks unintended consequences. Here’s a detailed critique based on the evidence:
1. Mischaracterization of Vaping as "the Great Health Issue of Our Time"
-
Inaccurate Focus: Butler's assertion that vaping is a major health crisis misrepresents the evidence. Leading health authorities, including the Royal College of Physicians, NHS, and Cancer Research UK, have consistently stated that vaping is substantially less harmful than smoking.
-
Missed Opportunity for Harm Reduction: Vaping is recognized as one of the most effective tools for quitting smoking. Demonizing vaping overlooks its value in reducing smoking rates.
Key Evidence: Studies show that vaping is at least as effective as other quitting aids, and the Royal College of Physicians recommends promoting e-cigarettes widely as a smoking cessation tool.
2. Inconsistent Messaging on Youth Vaping
-
Exaggeration of Youth Vaping Risks: Butler claimed there was a “marked reduction” in youth vaping due to policy changes. However, available evidence shows that most youth vaping is experimental and short-term with minimal evidence of progression to smoking.
-
Neglecting Harm Reduction Benefits: Youth vaping may displace cigarette smoking at a population level, which is a net public health benefit.
Key Evidence: UK research demonstrates that while youth vaping has risen, smoking rates have declined in parallel, indicating that vaping may be diverting young people from traditional smoking.
3. Enforcement-Heavy Approach with Limited Public Health Strategy
-
Focus on Border Seizures and Criminal Gangs: Butler emphasized enforcement as the primary response to illicit tobacco and vaping. While curbing illegal activity is important, this enforcement-first strategy fails to address the root causes driving the black market.
-
Black Market Growth Due to Poor Regulation: Australia's restrictive prescription-only model for nicotine vaping has inadvertently fueled unregulated sales and created a thriving black market.
Key Evidence: Countries with more balanced regulation—such as the UK, where legal nicotine vapes are available through licensed retail outlets—report lower youth smoking rates and better public health outcomes.
4. False Equivalence Between Vaping and Smoking
-
While illicit vaping products can pose risks, regulated vapes have been shown to be vastly safer than cigarettes.
-
Overstating vaping risks may discourage smokers from switching to a safer alternative.
Key Evidence: Nicotine itself is not the primary cause of smoking-related harm; it is the thousands of toxic chemicals from tobacco combustion that drive smoking’s deadly impact.
5. Flawed Measurement of Success
-
Butler claimed vaping reductions are proof of progress. However, without data on whether these former vapers returned to smoking, this metric is misleading. If vaping declines while smoking rises, this would represent a public health failure.
-
Studies have shown that vaping supports smoking cessation, and reducing access to regulated vapes risks reversing this progress.
Key Evidence: The UK’s Office for Health Improvement and Disparities has found that vaping is one of the most effective smoking cessation tools available.
6. Failure to Address the Prescription Model’s Flaws
-
Butler's silence on the failures of the prescription-only model is notable. This system has made it harder for adult smokers to access regulated products, inadvertently driving consumers to unregulated and potentially more dangerous alternatives.
Key Evidence: Australia's prescription-only model has been widely criticized for being ineffective and has created a black market dominated by criminal networks.
Mark Butler's approach emphasizes enforcement over public health strategy and relies heavily on fear-based rhetoric rather than evidence-based harm reduction. By misrepresenting vaping as a “great health issue,” failing to acknowledge the public health benefits of regulated vaping, and focusing excessively on enforcement, the current policy risks driving smokers back to cigarettes or into the black market.
-
"I'm very pleased to announce further funding of $160 million to double down on our efforts to stamp out this illegal market. We're sending a very clear message to organised criminal gangs who are operating this market. We're going to track you down. We're going to put you in the dock, and we're going to confiscate your criminal profits. The $160 million package I'm announcing today has a range of important elements. We will be boosting resources to federal law enforcement authorities, ABF, obviously being one of them, but also the Federal Police, the Criminal Intelligence Commission, AUSTRAC and others who have very significant experience and expertise in tracking down the money."
Mark Butler Is Wrong On Many Levels, and here is why:
Mark Butler's recent press conference heavily emphasized enforcement strategies, targeting organized crime, and expanding policing efforts to curb illegal tobacco and vaping markets. While tackling criminal activity is crucial, his statements reflect a flawed public health strategy that leans heavily on punitive measures rather than evidence-based approaches to reduce smoking rates effectively. Here's a detailed critique based on scientific evidence and harm reduction principles:
1. Overemphasis on Enforcement Without Addressing Root Causes
Claim: "The answer to illegal cigarettes is enforcement and prosecution."
-
Flawed Strategy: While law enforcement is an important tool to reduce criminal activity, relying solely on enforcement ignores the underlying causes of illicit markets. Australia's restrictive vaping laws and extremely high cigarette prices have created a thriving black market.
-
Evidence-Based Solution Ignored: Countries like the UK, which have regulated the sale of nicotine vaping products while ensuring safe access for adult smokers, have successfully reduced smoking rates without the same scale of black market issues.
-
Black Market Growth Linked to Policy: Australia's prescription-only model for nicotine vapes has inadvertently pushed vapers and smokers into unregulated markets where illicit products are sold freely.
Recommendation: Rather than focusing solely on enforcement, Australia should adopt a regulated retail model that provides access to legal nicotine vaping products for adult smokers, reducing the incentive for black market purchases.
2. Inaccurate Framing of Vaping as a Major Health Threat
Claim: "We saw this in vaping as well. It's a market that exploded under the former government's eyes without any activity."
-
Distortion of the Evidence: Butler’s comment implies that vaping is inherently dangerous, which contradicts substantial evidence showing that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking.
-
Vaping as Harm Reduction: Public health experts, including the Royal College of Physicians and NHS, strongly support vaping as a safer alternative for smokers attempting to quit.
-
Youth Vaping Overblown: Data shows that most youth vaping is experimental and short-term, while regular use among never-smokers remains rare.
Recommendation: Butler’s rhetoric risks deterring adult smokers from switching to vaping, a harm reduction tool that has been shown to be one of the most effective smoking cessation methods.
3. Misplaced Blame on Pricing as the Sole Driver of Illicit Tobacco
Claim: "The answer is not to drop the price... we still have a thriving criminal market."
-
Partial Truth: While high tobacco prices are an effective deterrent against smoking, excessive taxation can fuel illicit trade. Research shows that overpriced legal products often push consumers toward cheaper, unregulated alternatives.
-
Global Evidence Ignored: Countries like New Zealand and the UK have balanced high cigarette taxes with accessible vaping products, reducing both smoking rates and illicit market growth.
Recommendation: The government should combine high tobacco taxes with regulated, affordable alternatives like legal nicotine vaping products to offer safer options for smokers.
4. Conflating Illicit Tobacco with Vaping in a Misleading Way
Claim: "Illegal cigarettes undermine our efforts in two ways... by providing cheap cigarettes and getting around public health measures."
-
False Equivalence: While illegal cigarettes present a serious concern, Butler wrongly groups vaping into the same category, despite regulated vaping products being far safer.
-
Misleading Messaging: Conflating vaping with organized crime perpetuates harmful stigma that undermines its proven role as a quitting aid.
Recommendation: Clear, evidence-based communication is critical. Public messaging should distinguish between regulated nicotine vaping products (which are intended for harm reduction) and unregulated black-market items.
5. Failure to Acknowledge the Failures of Australia’s Prescription-Only Model
Claim: "The vaping market exploded under the former government's eyes without any activity."
-
Ignoring Policy Failures: The explosion of the illicit vaping market occurred largely because Australia's strict prescription-only model failed to provide smokers with safe and legal access to vaping products.
-
Expert Recommendations Overlooked: Health experts such as Dr Colin Mendelsohn have consistently argued that Australia’s regulatory model has been ineffective, driving consumers to unsafe black-market products.
Recommendation: Australia should move toward a licensed retail model that restricts youth access while ensuring adult smokers can obtain regulated nicotine vaping products safely.
6. Neglecting the Role of Harm Reduction
Claim: "The best way to deprive everyone of this revenue... is to stop smoking in this country."
-
Lack of Practical Strategy: While reducing smoking is the ultimate goal, Butler fails to acknowledge the role of harm reduction in achieving this. Evidence shows that vaping is one of the most effective quitting aids.
-
Ignoring Evidence-Based Solutions: Countries that have adopted a harm reduction approach—like the UK—have experienced faster declines in smoking rates.
Recommendation: Public health policies should promote vaping as a safer alternative for smokers who cannot quit using traditional methods.
7. Confusing Messaging on Illicit Retailers
Claim: "Retailers must realize that they are funding some of the worst criminal gangs."
-
Exaggerated Narrative: While criminal elements are involved in illicit tobacco sales, this rhetoric risks painting small businesses, some of whom may unknowingly sell unregulated products, as intentional criminals.
-
Policy Failure’s Role Ignored: The growth of these retailers is largely a result of Australia’s overly restrictive approach to nicotine vaping, which has driven consumers toward unregulated products.
Recommendation: A regulated retail system that allows licensed outlets to sell safe nicotine products would reduce the influence of criminal networks.
Mark Butler’s press conference reflects a deeply flawed understanding of effective tobacco control and harm reduction. His focus on enforcement overlooks the critical need for accessible, regulated alternatives to both smoking and illicit vaping products. By mischaracterizing vaping as a public health threat, failing to address the shortcomings of Australia’s prescription-only model, and ignoring global evidence supporting vaping as a smoking cessation tool, Butler risks undermining legitimate public health efforts.
Recommended Strategy for Australia:
✅ Introduce a regulated retail model for nicotine vaping products with strict age verification.
✅ Educate the public on the relative risks of vaping vs smoking.
✅ Implement targeted public health campaigns to inform smokers of safer alternatives.
✅ Strengthen enforcement against unregulated products while ensuring adult smokers can access legal nicotine vapes.Australia has the opportunity to embrace a balanced strategy that reduces smoking rates, undermines the black market, and protects public health
-
"EPSTEIN: So I just wonder if you think enforcement is making a difference? Border Force is already seizing four times as many cigarettes as they were just six years ago. So it's not that people don't think enforcement is a bad idea, but is it working? I mean, we've got more illegal tobacco and more tobacco fires than we've ever had and Border Force is taking in four times as many illegal cigarettes as they were just a few years ago. Is the enforcement working?
BUTLER: No, in the sense it's still an activity that you see in the community. We've got to do more, which is why we're allocating $160 million additional funds."
Mark Butler Is Wrong On Many Levels, and here is why:
Mark Butler's interview highlights Australia's aggressive stance on tobacco enforcement, yet his approach raises significant concerns about its effectiveness, its neglect of harm reduction strategies, and its misunderstanding of the broader public health landscape.
Here's a detailed critique:
1. Over-Reliance on Enforcement Despite Evidence of Ineffectiveness
Claim: "This is criminal activity... We're going to track them down, bring them to justice, and seize their profits."
-
Reality: Butler’s strong focus on enforcement as the primary solution overlooks key public health principles. While enforcement is essential in tackling organized crime, research shows that enforcement alone has limited impact on reducing illicit tobacco markets.
-
Escalating Enforcement with Limited Results: Despite Border Force seizing 1.3 billion cigarettes in six months—a significant increase—Butler admitted this hasn’t stopped the illicit market from thriving. This suggests that enforcement without alternative strategies is failing.
Key Evidence: Countries like the UK, which focus on accessible and regulated alternatives like vaping, have seen greater reductions in smoking rates without the same level of black-market growth.
Recommendation: Butler should prioritize harm reduction strategies alongside enforcement to address the demand for cheap alternatives, reducing reliance on illicit markets.
2. Failure to Recognize the Link Between Excessive Taxation and Illicit Trade
Claim: "The answer is not to drop the price... What that will do is drive smoking rates up."
-
Selective Use of Evidence: While Butler correctly notes that higher cigarette prices are linked to lower smoking rates, the relationship weakens when prices become excessive. Extreme price hikes often push smokers toward unregulated, illicit products rather than quitting.
-
Real-World Impact: Australia's rapid tobacco excise increases have created an enormous price gap between legal and illegal cigarettes. This has made illicit trade a more attractive option for price-conscious smokers.
-
Contradictory Global Data: Countries with lower cigarette prices, like the United States, also face illicit trade issues. However, Australia's unusually high cigarette prices have incentivized organized crime to exploit the profit gap even further.
Key Evidence: Studies show that disproportionately high cigarette prices may reduce legal sales but do not significantly accelerate smoking cessation without providing viable alternatives like regulated vaping.
Recommendation: While maintaining a tax deterrent, the government should balance this with accessible, regulated alternatives such as vaping to help smokers quit.
3. Misplaced Focus on Illicit Tobacco While Ignoring Safer Alternatives
Claim: "Enforcement is what it’s all about... That's what this package is all about."
-
Neglect of Harm Reduction: Butler's exclusive focus on enforcement ignores the proven success of harm reduction strategies like vaping. Research shows that vaping is one of the most effective tools for quitting smoking and is substantially less harmful than cigarettes.
-
Missed Opportunity: Australia’s prescription-only model for vaping has inadvertently contributed to a booming black market in unregulated vaping products. This is a critical factor in the overall increase in illicit trade, yet Butler fails to address this.
Key Evidence: The Royal College of Physicians and Public Health England strongly advocate for promoting vaping as a safer alternative for smokers. Countries that allow regulated nicotine vaping products have seen faster declines in smoking rates.
Recommendation: Butler should adopt a balanced public health strategy that includes supporting regulated vaping products as part of a harm reduction model.
4. Misleading Framing of Taxation as a Solely Effective Strategy
Claim: "Ask any expert anywhere in the world and they'll say price is probably the most important factor in driving down smoking rates."
-
Oversimplification: While price is a key factor, it is not the only effective strategy. Evidence shows that smokers are more likely to quit when they have access to effective alternatives such as regulated vapes, nicotine replacement therapies, and professional cessation support.
-
Public Health Failure: Australia’s smoking decline has stagnated in recent years, largely because excessive taxation and vaping restrictions have driven smokers toward illicit markets rather than toward quitting.
Key Evidence: The UK’s integrated strategy combining taxation, public health campaigns, and legal vaping access has driven the nation’s smoking rates down faster than Australia’s.
Recommendation: Butler should shift focus toward a comprehensive strategy that combines tax deterrence with accessible harm reduction tools like vaping.
5. Ignoring the Role of Australia’s Prescription-Only Vaping Model
Claim: "We'll be expanding enforcement to fight this trade."
-
Regulatory Failure: Australia’s prescription-only model has failed to provide smokers with safer alternatives, leaving them vulnerable to black-market sales of both cigarettes and unregulated vapes.
-
Missed Harm Reduction Opportunity: Countries like New Zealand and the UK have seen significant declines in smoking by making vaping products legally accessible while tightly regulating their sale.
Key Evidence: Research consistently shows that smokers who switch to regulated vaping products are more likely to quit successfully compared to those who attempt to quit unaided.
Recommendation: Butler should advocate for a shift toward a licensed retail model for regulated vaping products, ensuring adults have safe access to legal alternatives.
Mark Butler’s approach is heavily enforcement-focused, relying on punitive measures that have thus far failed to stem the illicit tobacco trade. His refusal to recognize the role of excessive taxation, combined with Australia’s restrictive vaping policies, is contributing to the very problem he is trying to solve.
Recommended Public Health Strategy for Australia:
✅ Introduce a regulated retail model for nicotine vaping products, with strict age verification and sales controls.
✅ Combine enforcement with harm reduction strategies to reduce demand for illicit products.
✅ Prioritize education campaigns promoting vaping as a safer alternative for adult smokers.
✅ Encourage access to smoking cessation support services in combination with safer nicotine products.
Australia has the potential to improve public health outcomes by following international best practices that combine targeted enforcement with practical harm reduction strategies.
-
GLENDAY: Just lastly, I want to put some context around this. I mean, black market cigarette packets can cost less than $20, and legal cigarettes, which have government taxes, can cost well over $50. That's a huge difference. And there's a view among law enforcement that this is perceived by criminals to be a lower risk enterprise than hard drug or heroin trafficking. Given the big money to be made, are you ever going to be able to get rid of the black market?
BUTLER: That's why we have to change that risk reward equation for criminal gangs and for, frankly, the retailers that are facilitating this by selling these cigarettes. The price is high in Australia. We have some of the most expensive cigarettes and we have some of the lowest rates of smoking and those two things are directly related. But countries that have much cheaper, legal cigarettes like the US the UK, many others, they still have a thriving criminal trade in cigarettes as well. I don't buy this argument that if we froze or reduced the price of legal cigarettes somehow, that would cause magically the criminal activity to cease and disappear. The only way to shut down this is enforcement is tracking them down, putting them in the dock, and ultimately seizing their profits.
Mark Butler is Wrong, Here's Why:
Mark Butler’s comments reflect a heavy focus on enforcement as the primary solution to Australia’s growing black market cigarette trade. While enforcement is a necessary component, his statements overlook key evidence on what truly drives illicit tobacco markets and ignores the role of harm reduction strategies. Here's a detailed critique:
1. Over-Simplification of Enforcement as the Sole Solution
Claim: "The only way to shut down this is enforcement... tracking them down, putting them in the dock, and seizing their profits."
-
Flawed Strategy: Butler’s assertion that enforcement alone is the key to stopping black market tobacco is overly simplistic and ignores evidence-based public health strategies. Despite intensified enforcement, Australia's illicit tobacco market continues to grow, illustrating that this approach is not working in isolation.
-
Real-World Evidence: Countries with a more balanced strategy—including accessible harm reduction tools like vaping—have seen greater success in reducing both smoking rates and illicit trade. For example, the UK has managed to reduce smoking rates without driving significant black-market growth by allowing regulated nicotine vaping products.
Recommendation: While enforcement is necessary, Butler should advocate for a comprehensive public health strategy that combines enforcement with improved access to safer, regulated alternatives like vaping.
2. Ignoring the Role of Excessive Taxation in Fueling the Illicit Market
Claim: "I don't buy this argument that if we froze or reduced the price of legal cigarettes... that would cause magically the criminal activity to cease and disappear."
-
Misleading Dismissal: While reducing cigarette prices is not a simple fix, Butler’s dismissal of taxation’s role in driving illicit trade ignores established economic evidence.
-
Economic Reality: Excessive tobacco taxes widen the price gap between legal and illicit products, making black-market cigarettes an attractive alternative for smokers who struggle with affordability. While taxes play an important role in discouraging smoking, overly aggressive price hikes risk pushing smokers into illegal markets rather than quitting altogether.
-
Australia's Unique Problem: Australia has some of the highest cigarette prices in the world, yet this has contributed to the largest black market tobacco trade per capita in the developed world. Butler’s failure to acknowledge this link is concerning.
Recommendation: Butler should recognize that while high cigarette prices have public health benefits, they must be coupled with viable alternatives like regulated vaping to reduce demand for illicit products.
3. Failure to Promote Harm Reduction Strategies
Claim: "This trade... undermines our public health efforts to stamp out smoking."
-
Missed Opportunity: Butler’s emphasis on enforcement ignores the most effective tool available for reducing smoking rates—harm reduction through vaping. The success of vaping as a quitting aid has been demonstrated in multiple studies, and public health bodies like the Royal College of Physicians, NHS, and Public Health England actively promote vaping as a safer alternative for smokers.
-
Current Policy's Role in Driving Illicit Trade: Australia's prescription-only model for nicotine vaping products has made it harder for adult smokers to access regulated alternatives, driving demand for illicit and unregulated products.
Recommendation: Butler should promote regulated nicotine vaping products as a safer and more effective alternative for smokers, reducing the demand for both legal and illicit cigarettes.
4. Misleading Comparison Between Australia and Other Countries
Claim: "Countries that have much cheaper cigarettes like the US and UK still have a thriving criminal trade in cigarettes."
-
Selective Evidence: While illicit trade exists in all countries, Butler ignores the critical difference between these markets: countries like the UK offer regulated, accessible alternatives such as vaping. This reduces reliance on black-market tobacco while still lowering smoking rates.
-
UK’s Balanced Strategy: The UK has achieved record-low smoking rates through a combination of accessible vaping products, public education campaigns, and proportionate tobacco taxes.
Recommendation: Butler should look to international models that balance enforcement with access to regulated harm reduction products, which have been proven to reduce both smoking rates and illicit trade.
5. Misleading Narrative on the Role of Retailers
Claim: "Retailers... selling these cigarettes... are bankrolling some of the worst criminal gangs."
-
Exaggerated Blame: While some retailers knowingly sell illicit products, others may unknowingly engage with suppliers distributing illegal goods. Blaming retailers without addressing the root causes—like excessive taxation and lack of safer alternatives—ignores the economic pressures that fuel this trade.
-
Policy-Induced Market Shift: Australia’s restrictive policies have driven legitimate retailers out of the regulated nicotine market, creating an opportunity for black-market suppliers to thrive.
Recommendation: Rather than vilifying retailers, Butler should focus on improving retail licensing systems to support businesses that adhere to legal standards while giving consumers access to safer alternatives.
Mark Butler’s strategy is overly reliant on enforcement while failing to address the root causes of Australia’s thriving illicit tobacco market. His dismissal of excessive taxation’s role, combined with a refusal to embrace harm reduction strategies like regulated vaping, reveals a narrow and ineffective public health approach.
Recommended Public Health Strategy for Australia:
✅ Introduce a regulated retail model for nicotine vaping products to provide adult smokers with a safer alternative.
✅ Maintain appropriate tobacco taxation levels but combine this with better access to harm reduction products.
✅ Expand public education campaigns highlighting vaping as a safer alternative for adult smokers.
✅ Strengthen retailer licensing systems to reduce illicit sales while providing legal access to regulated products.
✅ Combine targeted enforcement with alternative strategies to reduce consumer demand for illicit products.
Australia's smoking rates can be further reduced with a balanced approach that integrates enforcement with evidence-based harm reduction strategies.
-
"E-cigarette companies, including giants such as British American Tobacco, have actively lobbied governments in New Zealand and Australia to weaken existing vape regulations while preventing the introduction of stricter ones.
As part of their argument, they claim that for adolescents in New Zealand, the use of e-cigarettes (vaping) might be “displacing” cigarette smoking. They argue young people are opting for vapes over traditional cigarettes.
Their key piece of evidence for this claim is an influential study published in Lancet Public Health in 2020."
Authors: Becky Freeman & others
Flaws and Omissions in the Article
-
Mischaracterization of Vaping’s Harm Profile:
-
The article leans heavily on the narrative that vaping is contributing to adolescent smoking uptake without acknowledging the significant evidence supporting vaping as a safer alternative for adult smokers and an effective smoking cessation tool.
-
Public Health England, Cancer Research UK, and the Royal College of Physicians have all stated that vaping is far less harmful than smoking and has contributed to declines in adult smoking rates in several countries.
-
Evidence suggests that vaping is not a significant gateway to smoking, particularly when access is properly regulated.
-
-
Omission of Key Evidence on Youth Smoking Trends:
-
The article suggests that vaping is slowing the decline in smoking rates without adequately considering:
-
New Zealand’s declining youth smoking rates, which still remain historically low despite increases in vaping.
-
Studies in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand consistently show that regular vaping among never-smokers remains low and most youth vapers are either former smokers or those who would have experimented with smoking anyway.
-
-
-
Failure to Consider Tobacco Harm Reduction Framework:
-
The article overlooks the well-supported Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) model, which recognizes vaping as a viable alternative for smokers who struggle to quit using traditional methods.
-
The Royal College of Physicians explicitly endorses vaping as a safer substitute for smoking, emphasizing its public health benefits.
-
-
Potential Misinterpretation of Vaping’s Influence:
-
The claim that vaping may be contributing to smoking uptake lacks strong evidence. Recent reviews show that the relationship between vaping and smoking is more likely due to common risk factors (e.g., risk-taking behavior) rather than causation.
-
The article doesn’t sufficiently address the fact that youth smoking rates are declining, even in regions with high vaping prevalence.
-
-
Framing Bias:
-
The article repeatedly ties vaping to Big Tobacco influence. While it's true that tobacco companies have invested in vaping products, this doesn’t inherently negate the harm reduction potential of regulated vaping for adult smokers.
-
Focusing on industry motives may distract from the independent evidence that vaping can reduce smoking rates and improve public health.
-
Key Counter-Evidence from Reliable Sources
-
NHS (UK), Cancer Research UK, and Public Health England state that vaping is one of the most effective methods for quitting smoking and contributes positively to public health.
-
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) also endorses vaping as a harm minimization tool for smokers struggling to quit.
-
Evidence shows that most youth vapers are current or former smokers, and regular vaping among never-smokers is rare.
While the article presents a valuable critique of the 2020 Lancet Public Health study, it selectively emphasizes potential negative effects of vaping while downplaying evidence that vaping has reduced smoking rates and carries significantly lower risks than combustible tobacco. By failing to fully engage with the established evidence supporting vaping's harm reduction role, the article risks misleading policymakers and the public.
Balanced public health strategies should prioritize:
-
Strict regulations to prevent youth access.
-
Education campaigns that clarify vaping’s relative safety for adult smokers.
-
Support for vaping as a cessation tool, while discouraging non-smokers and youth from starting.
-
Healthcare is central to Labor's pitch to voters for re-election having promised billions of dollars to bolster bulk-billing, which the Coalition promptly matched.
But there is little for mental health and the booming illegal tobacco trade has also punched a $6.9 billion hole in the books as a result of falling tobacco excise revenue.
Producer: Jacqueline Breen - ABC
Can I ask about the black hole in your budget because of tobacco excise? Now you have continually put up the tobacco excise. We learnt that this has cost the federal government and also us taxpayers $7 billion over five years. We know a lot of that money now has gone to organised crime organisations.
Producer: JULES SCHILLER - ABC
*Claim / Why It Fails
*Excise deters smoking / Only up to a point; then fuels black market
*Crime exists globally / Doesn’t excuse policies that create more local demand for illicit products
*Lowering prices won’t work / ignores models in UK/NZ where moderate pricing + regulated access are successful
*“We’re doing this for health” / But block access to vapes, which are far less harmful
*“Excise works” / Smoking rates are stagnating; policy is failing the most disadvantaged
*“Beer tax is different” / Contradicts harm-based logic applied to tobacco
Earlier on the program, Minister, we were talking to Rohan Pike, who's a former federal police officer, and helped to set up Border Force's illegal tobacco taskforce. I was asking him about the increase that we've seen in the budget for enforcement to deal with the tobacco issue and he was saying, in his view, from his experience at least, that enforcement wasn't the way to go here. Why are you confident that it is?
BUTLER: Our additional enforcement efforts have resulted in a very big increase in seizures of illegal cigarettes at the border. A 50 per cent increase in one year, to the point where in 6 months we've seized 1.3 billion cigarettes, just an extraordinary number. Our enforcement measures are also working with vaping. We've seized millions and millions of vapes at the border, and I know that our measures there have led to a substantial reduction in vaping, importantly, particularly among younger people, teenagers and very young adults. Vaping rates are down about 30 per cent for adults over the age of 30, vaping rates are down about 50 per cent, and importantly for parents and school leaders, suspensions at school because of vaping are down 50 per cent in the last year because of the measures we've put in place. I accept this is not easy. I've never pretended this was going to be easy. We're not only fighting big tobacco here, we're also fighting organised crime, but we're determined to do this.
Mark Butler is Wrong, Here's Why:
Mark Butler's statement in favour of enforcement-heavy measures to curb vaping and illegal tobacco use is problematic and misleading for several reasons—especially in light of well-established harm reduction strategies and the unintended consequences of prohibition-style policy.
Here’s a breakdown of where Butler goes wrong:
🧩 1. Over-reliance on enforcement ignores the root cause of demand
While Butler cites large seizure volumes (e.g. 1.3 billion illegal cigarettes and "millions of vapes"), this is not evidence of effectiveness, but rather a symptom of a thriving black market—which his policies have helped fuel.
“Australia’s prescription-only regulatory model of vaping has produced a thriving black market controlled by criminal networks in which unregulated vaping products are sold freely to youth.”— Dr Colin Mendelsohn, Evidence Review
Seizures show how widespread the issue is, not that it's being solved.
📉 2. There's no solid evidence that enforcement reduced youth vaping by 50%
Butler claims school suspensions due to vaping dropped by 50%—but provides no source. Independent reviews show:
-
Frequent vaping among teen non-smokers is rare in Australia
-
Most youth vaping is experimental and short-term, not a sign of long-term addiction
-
Sensationalist fears of a "teen vaping epidemic" are not supported by population-level data
🚫 3. Enforcement-led policy is harming adult smokers
Australia's approach has made safer nicotine products harder to access for smokers, despite robust evidence that:
-
Vaping is one of the most effective ways to quit smoking
-
It’s substantially less harmful than smoking
By blocking access and driving vaping underground, Butler’s policy increases harm for adult smokers, especially in low-income communities.
Public health experts overwhelmingly recommend a regulated, retail-based model for adult vaping products—paired with strict age controls and accurate information. Enforcement alone, without access to safer alternatives, does not reduce demand, and may cause more harm than good.
-
February
Retailers have slammed the state government for its “farcical” response to the tobacco black market as it’s revealed inspectors won’t be checking for illicit smokes until at least 2026.
Dedicated inspectors will not be on the ground enforcing the tobacco licensing scheme for at least another year, the Herald Sun can reveal.
Despite legislation being passed in November last year, and the scheme set to be operational in five months, the Herald Sun can reveal licensing inspectors won’t be checking for illicit tobacco until at least 2026.
by Jon Kaila Herald Sun
However, lessons from past prohibitions, from alcohol to tobacco, suggest that bans tend to exacerbate the problems they seek to solve. History and evidence indicate that regulation is a far more effective and ethical approach.
By adopting a harm reduction framework, Victoria can manage e-cigarettes in a way that prioritises public health, minimises criminal justice impacts, and curtails illicit markets.
by Lili Cavanah - Drug Policy Australia
University of Queensland researchers have found smoking rates have declined twice as fast in New Zealand as in Australia, suggesting less restrictive regulation on vaping could improve public health outcomes.
Action for Smokefree 2025 Director Ben Youdan says “hundreds of thousands” of people in New Zealand have switched from vaping to smoking.
Mr Youdan says vaping is “substantially less harmful” than smoking.
“There’s been significant reviews of global evidence,” he told Sky News Australia.
“People smoke from the nicotine, but it’s the smoke and the tar … that causes almost all the death and diseases.
“In New Zealand, we’ve seen hundreds of thousands of people have switched to vaping from smoking.
“To the point where we’ve actually seen smoking reach half in five years.”
A Melbourne woman, who died after becoming trapped inside a townhouse targeted in a firebombing attack, has been confirmed as the first "innocent" victim of the ongoing war over the city's illicit tobacco market.
A criminal turf war has been increasingly spilling out into the open with more than 40 firebombing attacks on illicit tobacco and vape shops across Victoria in the last six months alone.
Australia’s success in reducing smoking has led to smokers here being taxed at one of the highest rates amongst comparable nations, with taxes set to further increase.
Criminologists like Dr James martin from Deakin university question whether the tax increases are fuelling this rise in criminal activity.
Look, I can’t say much more other than they are idiots. Idiots who think that they’re mighty in regards to tobacco control. That combination of ego and idiocy is driving their response to vaping.
A Herald Sun investigation can reveal 1044 shops have been found selling illegal cigarettes, vapes or tobacco pouches since March 2023, when the firebombings began.
There are 534 Woolworths and 425 Coles stores in Victoria, a total of 959 shops.
The Queensland government has announced $2 million to help put a lid on bin fires sparked by batteries found in e-scooters, vapes, and electric toothbrushes.
Vision released by the Brisbane City Council has detailed a string of incidents in recent years where battery fires have erupted at local dumps.
The council said fires have also broken out in garbage trucks — forcing drivers to dump the rubbish as quickly as possible.
Australia is a world leader in tobacco control and our high tobacco taxes have made smoking an incredibly expensive habit.
But in the last couple of years, there's been a big shift in how tobacco is being sold in Australia.These cheap and easy to buy untaxed cigarettes are driving organised crime and making it harder for people to quit.
Guests
Coral Gartner - Professor of Public Health, University of Queensland
Tara - longer term smoker
"In a powerful new advertisement marking 25 years of the "Make Smoking History" campaign, the Cancer Council of Western Australia has delivered a poignant message: quitting may be hard, but the heartbreak inflicted on loved ones is far more devastating."
What is wrong with this article?
The article correctly highlights the dangers of smoking but misrepresents vaping by downplaying its role in harm reduction and overstating its risks. A more balanced approach, acknowledging that vaping is far safer than smoking and can help smokers quit, would provide a more scientifically accurate message.
One in six Aussies are potentially putting their friends and family at risk thanks to nasty chemicals left behind by a common dirty habit.
What Is Wrong With This Article?:
The article by Jack Nivison in the Herald Sun, "This bad habit could give your kids cancer", contains several misleading or inaccurate claims about vaping and third-hand exposure. Below are the key points where the article is problematic, backed by evidence:
1. Third-hand Vaping Exposure and Health Risks
-
The article claims that "children and teenagers were highly susceptible to ingestion, absorption, and inhalation of e-cigarette vapour simply by being within close proximity of the residue left behind by vaping."
-
The reality: There is no solid evidence that third-hand exposure to vaping residues poses a significant health risk. According to Dr. Colin Mendelsohn and the NHS, vaping releases far fewer harmful chemicals than smoking, and passive exposure is significantly lower than with traditional cigarettes.
-
What experts say: The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has stated that “there is no direct evidence that passive exposure is likely to cause significant harm”.
2. Mice Study Extrapolation to Humans
-
The article refers to a Woolcock Institute study on mice, claiming that even touching nicotine-free vape liquid caused cognitive impairment.
-
The reality: Animal studies do not directly translate to human health risks. The doses and exposure methods used in laboratory settings often do not reflect real-world human exposure.
-
Key issue: Studies on rodents often use extreme exposure levels that do not mimic human vaping habits. For example, the RANZCP notes that “nicotine vaping products have specific risks, but they must be balanced against their potential to reduce smoking-related harm”.
3. Formaldehyde and Cancer Risk
-
The article states that “one of the most common chemicals in vapes is formaldehyde” and “exposure to formaldehyde 100% does cause cancer”.
-
The reality: While formaldehyde can be produced in very high-temperature conditions (e.g., dry-puffing), normal vaping temperatures do not generate dangerous levels of formaldehyde.
-
Public health expert perspective: Cancer Research UK states, “There is no good evidence that vaping causes cancer. Vaping is far less harmful than smoking because e-cigarettes don’t contain tobacco”.
4. Vape Residue on Windscreens and Health Risks
-
The article refers to a Reddit user struggling with vape residue on their windscreen and then links this to serious health risks.
-
The reality: Vape residue is primarily a mix of propylene glycol and vegetable glycerine, which are not classified as toxic or harmful to health at the levels typically encountered.
-
Important context: Unlike tar from cigarettes, which contains thousands of harmful chemicals, vape residue does not contain the same carcinogenic byproducts.
5. Youth Anxiety and Brain Damage Claims
-
The article states that mice exposed to nicotine vape aerosol experienced “brain cell destruction” and “heightened anxiety”.
-
The reality: No high-quality human studies support the claim that nicotine vaping causes brain cell destruction. While nicotine can have effects on the developing brain, the risks are much lower than the risks of smoking.
-
What studies actually show: The NHS states that “nicotine itself does not cause cancer, lung disease, heart disease, or stroke”.
6. Exaggeration of Youth Vaping Crisis
-
The article suggests that youth vaping is a massive and growing public health threat in Australia.
-
The reality: Data from ASH UK and other public health sources show that most youth vaping is experimental and short-term, and regular vaping among non-smoking youth is uncommon.
-
Expert insight: The UK’s Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) concluded that “vaping is at least as effective as other quitting methods and contributes to smoking decline in populations where it is accessible”.
The article by Jack Nivison is misleading and exaggerated in several areas. It employs fear-based tactics, misinterprets scientific studies, and fails to provide balanced evidence. The biggest flaws include:
-
Lack of evidence on third-hand vaping exposure risks.
-
Overreliance on animal studies that do not translate well to human risks.
-
False claims about formaldehyde and cancer risk.
-
Misleading claims about vape residue.
-
Overstating youth vaping concerns without considering its role in reducing smoking.
For a balanced and evidence-based perspective on vaping, refer to Public Health England, Cancer Research UK, the NHS, and the Royal College of Physicians.
-
World-leading vaping reforms in Australia are making a difference in the nation’s schools, according to new data, which shows the country is among the first globally to show early signs of success in slowing or halting the rise in adolescent vape access and use.
What Is Wrong With This Article?:
Rebuttal of Misleading or Questionable Statements in the EducationHQ Article
The article claims that Australia’s world-leading vaping reforms are working based on early indicators from a Cancer Council report. However, there are several misleading or unsubstantiated assertions in the piece that require closer scrutiny.
1. “World-leading vaping reforms in Australia are making a difference in the nation’s schools...”
Rebuttal:
-
While the government has introduced some of the most extreme restrictions on vaping globally, Australia remains an outlier compared to other leading public health nations like the UK, New Zealand, and Canada, which have embraced regulated access rather than prohibition.
-
Prohibitionist policies have historically failed in other public health domains. The black market for vaping in Australia is booming, with unregulated products still readily available to youth despite the ban.
2. “The new Cancer Council report says... Australia is turning the corner on youth vaping.”
Rebuttal:
-
The Cancer Council has a well-documented bias against vaping, often cherry-picking data to support its anti-vaping stance while ignoring the benefits of harm reduction.
-
Youth vaping figures in Australia have been historically overestimated by public health groups, and self-reported data from surveys can be unreliable due to social desirability bias—where respondents tell researchers what they think they want to hear.
3. “85% of people aged 14 to 17 reported they had never vaped.”
Rebuttal:
-
This figure may seem high, but it aligns with previous data that showed regular vaping among youth remains low and is mostly confined to those who previously smoked.
-
International research consistently finds that youth vaping does not lead to smoking, but rather displaces it.
4. “The proportion of young people who have never smoked is also at its highest rate at almost 94%...”
Rebuttal:
-
This statistic supports the argument that vaping is not creating a new generation of smokers. If vaping were truly a gateway to smoking, we would expect smoking rates to increase, not decrease.
-
Instead of acknowledging this positive trend, the article uses it to justify continued restrictions, even though a more reasonable conclusion would be that vaping is contributing to the decline in youth smoking.
5. “Young people are more aware than ever before of the dangers of vaping...”
Rebuttal:
-
The fact that 82% of young people now believe vaping is unsafe suggests that misinformation campaigns have been highly effective in spreading fear.
-
This statistic does not reflect an objective assessment of risk. The overwhelming scientific consensus, including the UK NHS, Public Health England, and the Royal College of Physicians, confirms that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking.
-
Fear-based messaging may discourage adult smokers from switching to vaping, prolonging smoking rates and increasing health harms.
6. “Mark Butler: ‘We have finally turned the corner on the scourge of vaping.’”
Rebuttal:
-
The framing of vaping as a scourge ignores its well-documented public health benefits. Vaping is a tool for smoking cessation, and many ex-smokers rely on it to stay smoke-free.
-
The government’s prohibitionist approach has driven vaping underground, making it harder to regulate and easier for criminals to profit.
-
In contrast, the UK actively encourages adult smokers to switch to vaping, offering free vape kits to those trying to quit smoking.
7. “Since October 1, all vapes have been available only as behind-the-counter sales in pharmacies.”
Rebuttal:
-
The prescription model has been a failure. Very few doctors are willing to prescribe nicotine vapes, and the complexity of the system discourages smokers from switching.
-
This policy has not been adopted by any other leading public health nation, because it makes access harder for adult smokers while doing little to prevent youth vaping.
-
The real consequence has been a thriving black market, with criminal networks now controlling supply, rather than licensed retailers.
8. “Rates have dropped by a third in 15 to 29-year-olds, according to SAHMRI.”
Rebuttal:
-
No details are given on how this data was collected or how vaping use was measured.
-
If true, this could reflect fear-based deterrence rather than a genuine reduction in demand—meaning users may have simply shifted to unregulated sources rather than quitting.
-
If vaping rates truly have dropped, but smoking rates have not—this would be a public health failure, not a success.
9. “Suspensions relating to vaping at South Australian schools have dropped by 50%.”
Rebuttal:
-
The decline in suspensions may not mean a real reduction in youth vaping. Schools may have simply adjusted their enforcement policies or found alternative disciplinary measures.
-
Without reliable tracking mechanisms, we cannot conclude that fewer students are vaping—only that they are being caught less often.
10. “Efforts nationwide to ban mobile phones in schools also appear to be having the desired effect.”
Rebuttal:
-
The mobile phone ban is unrelated to vaping policies, yet it is mentioned in a way that suggests both policies are equally successful.
-
While reducing distractions in class may be beneficial, this does not validate the government's approach to vaping.
Final Thoughts: A Public Health Opportunity Squandered
Australia’s approach to vaping remains an outlier, ignoring the harm reduction benefits recognized by public health authorities in the UK, New Zealand, and Sweden.
The government and anti-vaping groups continue to frame vaping as a crisis, despite evidence that it:
-
Helps adult smokers quit.
-
Does not lead to youth smoking.
-
Is far less harmful than smoking.
-
Is best managed through regulation, not prohibition.
Instead of acknowledging the failure of a prescription-only/pharmacist model, policymakers double down on misinformation—ignoring the fact that bans fuel black markets, make adult access harder, and leave youth more vulnerable to illegal products.
The article conflates youth vaping with a broader moral panic, and offers no solutions for adult smokers—who remain the real victims of poor regulation.
What Should Be Done Instead?
-
Adopt a regulated consumer model, where adult smokers can legally access safe, tested products.
-
Increase enforcement on the black market, rather than punishing legal retailers and adult users.
-
Stop misinformation campaigns, which scare smokers away from switching.
-
Follow international best practices, rather than pushing policies no other country has successfully implemented.
The Bottom Line
Australia has not turned a corner on vaping—it has simply pushed it underground. The so-called "success" of these reforms is a dangerous illusion, and the real losers are adult smokers seeking a safer alternative.
-
West Moreton Health is warning businesses ignoring Queensland’s smoking laws that they will get caught, while also encouraging those struggling with nicotine addition to seek support.
In a significant public health win, one company was fined $45,000 plus $2,250 in professional costs by the Ipswich Magistrates Court on 17 January 2025 for selling illicit tobacco and vapes, as well as breaching regulations on the display and advertising of smoking products.
Just days later, on 20 January 2025, another business that sold vapes, was fined $40,000 plus $250 in professional costs for unlawfully supplying nicotine, a hazardous poison.
What Is Wrong With This Article?:
While the article attempts to highlight public health concerns regarding illicit tobacco and vaping products, it presents several misleading claims, lacks evidence-based information, and overlooks key facts about vaping and harm reduction. Here’s a breakdown of the major issues:
1. Misleading Language and Fear-Based Messaging
-
The article repeatedly emphasizes “dangerously high levels of nicotine” and “toxic chemicals” in illegal vapes without clear evidence or context.
✅ Fact Check: While illicit vaping products can be unregulated and may pose risks, regulated nicotine vapes are significantly less harmful than smoking. Public Health England (now OHID) and Cancer Research UK confirm that vaping is substantially less harmful than smoking.
Statements that vaping “causes lung damage, heart issues, and long-term addiction” are unsubstantiated when referring to legal vaping products.
🚨 Problem: The language ignores the scientific consensus that nicotine itself is not a major cause of smoking-related diseases.
It is the tar and toxins in combustible tobacco smoke that cause harm, not nicotine.
2. Incorrect Characterization of Nicotine as a “Hazardous Poison”
-
The article refers to nicotine as a “hazardous poison.” While nicotine is toxic in large doses, it is widely used safely in approved nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) such as patches, gums, and inhalers.
✅ Fact Check: Nicotine’s risks are dose-dependent and not inherently poisonous in the amounts found in regulated e-liquids or NRT products. The Royal College of Physicians states that nicotine, in the doses used in vaping, presents minimal risk.
🚨 Problem: By equating nicotine with “poison,” the article perpetuates stigma around vaping products, potentially deterring adult smokers from switching to a less harmful alternative.
3. Omission of Harm Reduction Evidence
-
The article fails to mention that vaping is one of the most effective tools for smoking cessation. Evidence from multiple studies confirms that vaping is at least as effective — if not more effective — than traditional NRT in helping smokers quit.
✅ Fact Check: The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines endorse vaping as a viable cessation tool for smokers. The NHS and Cancer Research UK consistently promote vaping as a less harmful alternative to smoking.
🚨 Problem: By failing to communicate the benefits of vaping for smokers, the article misses a crucial opportunity to educate the public about tobacco harm reduction.
4. Conflation of Illicit and Regulated Vaping Products
-
The article blurs the line between unregulated, illicit vapes and regulated, legal nicotine products.
✅ Fact Check: Illicit vaping products can indeed be unsafe due to unknown ingredients and excessive nicotine levels. However, regulated vaping products sold in the UK, Australia (via prescription), and Europe adhere to strict safety standards that limit nicotine content and ban harmful additives.
🚨 Problem: The article fails to distinguish between dangerous black-market vapes and safer, regulated vaping products designed to help smokers quit.
5. Overemphasis on Enforcement and Penalties
-
The article strongly emphasizes punitive measures such as fines and imprisonment without addressing the root cause of the black market: Australia’s overly restrictive prescription-only model for nicotine vaping.
✅ Fact Check: Australia’s prescription-only model has unintentionally fueled the illegal vape market, making it easier for minors to obtain unregulated products. A well-regulated retail model — as seen in the UK and New Zealand — has proven far more effective in reducing youth access while ensuring safe products for adult smokers.
🚨 Problem: Stronger enforcement alone will not solve the black-market issue. Solutions must include accessible, regulated vaping products with clear age restrictions.
6. Inadequate Support for Smokers Seeking to Quit
-
While the article mentions Quitline and NRT, it neglects the evidence that vaping is a more effective quitting aid for many smokers.
✅ Fact Check: Research shows that smokers who switch to vaping are more likely to quit successfully than those relying solely on willpower or NRT.
🚨 Problem: Failing to provide accurate, evidence-based guidance on vaping as a cessation tool may deter smokers from making a switch that could significantly improve their health.
The article presents an incomplete and potentially misleading narrative about vaping.
While it correctly warns about the dangers of unregulated products, it fails to:
-
Acknowledge the proven benefits of regulated vaping products for adult smokers.
-
Differentiate between legal and illicit vaping products.
-
Present a balanced harm reduction approach that combines public education, access to safer alternatives, and targeted enforcement.
-
Suggested Improvements for Public Messaging:
✅ Emphasize the importance of regulated nicotine products as a safer alternative for adult smokers.
✅ Promote licensed retail models with strict age-verification processes to reduce youth access.
✅ Educate the public that nicotine itself is not the primary cause of smoking-related diseases.
✅ Encourage clear, evidence-based messaging that vaping is an effective tool for quitting smoking, not a product for non-smokers or youth.By aligning public health messaging with established evidence, Queensland authorities can better protect youth, reduce black-market sales, and support adult smokers in making informed choices for improved health outcomes.
-
Ellot Says to Butler: Speaking of things that are good for the health; vapes, and you were very strong on this in late 2023. I think you described them as, you know, a health crisis, particularly amongst young people. Now, every day I walk past three shops leaving work to go home that openly sell vapes, they’re tobacco shops, they've got hookah pipes in the window. They have electronics, in one case, a painted sign saying “Vapes here, vapes here, vapes here.” I thought you were going to stamp that out?
What Is Wrong With What Buler Said In This Interview?:
Rebuttal of Misleading or Incorrect Statements by Health Minister Mark Butler:
Mark Butler's statements in this interview contain several misleading claims about vaping rates, enforcement, and public health implications. Below is a detailed rebuttal of key points.
1. “We've had research out over the last couple of months that is showing really good results on vaping rates, particularly among kids. Vaping rates among young people up to 30, teenagers and very young adults is down 30 per cent last year.”
Rebuttal:
-
The claim that youth vaping has dropped by 30% lacks context and transparency. It is unclear which study he is referring to, what methodology was used, and whether these findings account for underreporting due to fear of legal consequences.
-
Cherry-picking statistics from self-reported surveys does not necessarily indicate a real decline in vaping—only a decline in reported use. If young people know vaping is now illegal, they may be less likely to admit using it, especially in government-sponsored surveys.
-
The most important missing piece: Has smoking among youth increased as a result? If vaping rates have fallen but smoking rates have risen, then this is a public health disaster, not a success.
2. “Interestingly, vaping rates for people over the age of 30 has halved in the last year. It's down by 50 per cent.”
Rebuttal:
-
If true, this is not a sign of success—it is a major public health failure. The majority of vapers over 30 are former or current smokers who use vaping to reduce or quit smoking.
-
If adult vaping has declined, it likely means that:
-
Smokers are struggling to access legal vapes and are either going back to cigarettes or resorting to unregulated black-market products.
-
Fewer smokers are switching to vaping, meaning fewer people are transitioning to a less harmful alternative.
-
-
There is no mention of whether smoking rates have changed. If smoking rates have increased due to reduced vaping, then the policy is actively harming public health.
3. “One of the really good results we got from this research… is that school suspensions for vaping are down by 50 per cent just in one year.”
Rebuttal:
-
A reduction in school suspensions does not mean that vaping has actually declined in schools—it may just mean that schools have changed how they handle vaping incidents.
-
Schools may be adopting alternative disciplinary measures rather than suspensions, or students may be more discreet in their vaping due to heightened awareness of penalties.
-
This statistic does not prove a real reduction in youth vaping!
4. “People are openly flouting what is now the law and really strong penalties… Millions of dollars in fines, the potential of jail time for people flouting these laws.”
Rebuttal:
-
The fact that illicit vape sales are still widespread despite harsh penalties proves that prohibition is failing.
-
Criminalizing vaping creates a thriving black market rather than stopping use. This is exactly what has happened with tobacco, alcohol, and drug prohibition in the past.
-
The people most affected by this crackdown are not criminals, but adult smokers who rely on vaping as a harm-reduction tool.
-
Contrast this with the UK approach: The NHS actively promotes vaping as a smoking cessation tool, while Australia treats it as a criminal issue, making it harder for adults to quit smoking.
5. “We've got a very clear understanding between police agencies and health agencies that where there's some involvement of organised crime, the police will get involved.”
Rebuttal:
-
The black market was created by the government’s restrictive policies. Before the prescription-only model, vapes were available through regulated vendors.
-
Now, the market is dominated by criminals. Instead of fixing the policy, the government is spending resources on enforcement, which historically has failed in every other form of prohibition.
-
Countries with regulated access to vaping—such as the UK, Canada, and New Zealand—do not have the same scale of black-market problems.
6. “This is a serious public health problem.”
Rebuttal:
-
The real public health crisis is smoking—not vaping. Vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking and is one of the most effective smoking cessation tools available.
-
The Australian government should be focusing on reducing smoking rates, but instead, it has created a policy environment where:
-
Smokers have limited access to vapes.
-
The black market flourishes with unregulated products.
-
Youth still access vapes illegally, while adult smokers face unnecessary barriers to quitting.
-
-
Butler is misframing vaping as a crisis, when the real problem is smoking and the unintended consequences of prohibition.
7. “Now we're starting to see good results in terms of vaping behaviour by young people, but we've got to lift the game on enforcement.”
Rebuttal:
-
The “good results” Butler refers to are questionable at best. If the crackdown on vaping is not reducing youth smoking rates, then it is a failure.
-
The key question remains unanswered: Has youth smoking increased? If smoking rates rise because vaping is less accessible, then the government is actively harming public health.
-
The focus on enforcement is misguided. Instead of pushing vapers into the black market, Australia should adopt a tightly regulated legal market, similar to:
-
The UK’s licensed retail system.
-
New Zealand’s approach, which allows adult access while enforcing strong youth protections.
-
Final Verdict on Butler’s Claims
📌 Key Takeaways:
✅ Vaping rates among youth may not actually be declining—reporting bias, enforcement, and underreporting could be influencing the data.
✅ The reduction in adult vaping is a disaster, not a success. It likely means more smokers are struggling to quit or returning to cigarettes.
✅ Prohibition has failed—illicit vape sales are rampant despite harsh penalties, proving that black markets thrive when legal access is restricted.
✅ School suspensions falling does not mean youth vaping has dropped—it could mean that schools are simply handling cases differently.
✅ Butler’s approach prioritizes enforcement over public health, ignoring international evidence that regulated access is the most effective strategy.The Better Alternative?
🚀 Instead of a failing prohibition model, Australia should:
🔹 Allow regulated retail access for adult smokers while strictly enforcing age restrictions.
🔹 Crack down on black-market suppliers, rather than punishing adult vapers and retailers who follow regulations.
🔹 Adopt harm reduction strategies, like the UK, Canada, and New Zealand, where vaping is recognized as a public health tool.
🔹 End fear-based misinformation campaigns, which discourage smokers from switching to a safer alternative.Butler’s “success story” is a policy failure in disguise. Instead of protecting public health, Australia’s vaping policy is driving harm underground, criminalizing smokers, and fueling a dangerous black market. 🚨
-
January
Tobacco excise revenue has shrunk to a nine-year low as smokers turn to the black market for cheaper cigarettes, prompting calls for the federal government to boost enforcement to plug the growing shortfall.
The federal government collected just $9.7 billion from the tobacco excise last financial year, according to Treasury, a 40 per cent fall from the record $16.3 billion haul in 2019-20 and the lowest take since 2014-15.
Australia's major independent supermarket chain says its stores are losing millions of dollars a year in legal cigarette sales due to the surge in the illicit tobacco trade.
The boss of IGA is calling on federal and state governments to do more when it comes to stopping the trade of illicit tobacco.
It comes after the supermarket chain recorded a loss of $150 million in legal cigarette sales over the last three years.
All of Australia’s big-six bikie gangs have had a part in the raging tobacco wars of the past two years.
Some of the bikies’ work is hand in glove with the powerful Middle-eastern organised crime syndicates which are fighting to control the multi-billion dollar sector.
The bikies have been implicated in firebombings of shops and other businesses, but there has also been evidence they are connected to big importations of smokes and vapes.
by: Mark Buttler and Regan Hodge Herald Sun
We hear from not one but two widely regarded experts on the regulations best imposed on smoking and vaping regulations with each holding contrasting conclusions.
featuring Harm Reduction Australia member Dr Alex Wodak and University of Sydney Public Health Emeritus Professor Simon Chapman
reporters: Dr John Jiggens and Mia Armitage
Tobacconists and businesses have copped tens of millions of dollars in damages amid the state’s disastrous illicit tobacco warfare — and the number of attacks is still on rise. See the stats.
And after 128 arson hits on businesses linked to the friction within the tobacco turf war, the total damage bill has been estimated to be more than $70m.
The true cost of the tobacco war is sure to be far greater as that figure does not account for a rise in insurance premiums, police resources, court and legal costs.
Queensland's crime watchdog has wielded controversial confiscation laws against alleged sellers of illicit tobacco for the first time, targeting a man who says he once worked in Iraqi military intelligence.
The Supreme Court action has already frozen assets, including $836,000 in cash, bank accounts and four properties that authorities allege are linked to Oliver Bailey.
TBA
Source>>
2024
December
Pharmacies have been slow to take up the sale of vapes, despite new laws restricting other sellers, with only 3,500 vapes sold without a prescription in a month.
Chemist Warehouse is among the powerful shareholders in Liber Pharmaceuticals, a company that has vowed to never target the recreational market.
by ABC - Rhiana Whitson
The Albanese Government has committed an additional $107 million for the regulation and enforcement of Australia’s world-leading new laws on vaping products.
The Department of Health and Aged Care and the Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) will use this funding to continue its work to crack down on non-therapeutic vapes, regulate vaping goods as therapeutic goods, and enforce the ban on advertising of vaping goods.
🔎 Misdirection of Focus – Harm Reduction Neglected:
-
The statement fails to recognize vaping’s established role as a harm reduction tool for adult smokers. Evidence consistently shows that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and is one of the most effective methods for smoking cessation.
-
Countries like the UK have embraced vaping as a harm reduction strategy. The Royal College of Physicians supports e-cigarettes as a safer alternative for smokers and recommends promoting their use among adult smokers to improve public health.
🔎 Youth Vaping Exaggerations:
-
Evidence shows that most youth who vape are current or former smokers, and frequent vaping by never-smokers is rare.
-
Data from the UK and Australia highlights that concerns about a “generation hooked on nicotine” are overstated.
🔎 Potential for Counterproductive Outcomes:
-
The prohibition-style approach could worsen the black market, where unregulated and potentially more dangerous products may flourish.
-
Similar restrictions in Australia’s past have led to a thriving black market for vapes, often with poor product quality and unknown ingredients.
🔎 Impact on Adult Smokers:
-
Restricting access to regulated, safer vaping products may discourage adult smokers from switching to vaping. This could drive some back to smoking, which is far more harmful.
🔎 Missed Opportunity for Evidence-Based Regulation:
-
Expert advice often recommends a regulated retail model—where vapes are sold by licensed retailers with strict age verification and product standards—rather than a prescription-only system.
-
Countries such as New Zealand and the UK have found success with this approach by balancing access for adult smokers while minimizing youth uptake.
🔎 Harsh Penalties – Disproportionate Response:
-
Imposing penalties such as seven years in jail and fines up to $21.9 million appears excessive. Comparable public health issues like alcohol and tobacco have not seen such severe legal measures.
-
In a significant crackdown on the illegal vape market, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and WA Health have conducted a successful joint enforcement operation, with assistance from Australian Federal Police (AFP), resulting in the seizure of more than 60,000 allegedly illicit vapes valued at just under $1.9 million and $198,000 of infringement notices being issued to 10 retail businesses across Perth for unlawful vape supply..
Critique:
1. Missed Acknowledgement of Vaping's Role in Harm Reduction
🔎 Vaping as a Harm Reduction Tool for Smokers:
-
The statement neglects to mention that regulated nicotine vapes are a proven harm reduction tool for adult smokers trying to quit combustible cigarettes. Research from the NHS, Royal College of Physicians, and Cancer Research UK all confirm that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and one of the most effective quitting aids available.
-
The omission risks demonizing all vaping products rather than distinguishing between legitimate therapeutic use and illicit products.
🔎 Impact on Adult Smokers Seeking Safer Alternatives:
-
With the crackdown limiting retail access and restricting vapes to pharmacies only, smokers may find it harder to access regulated, safer products, increasing the risk of relapse to smoking—a far more harmful behavior.
2. Potential for Unintended Consequences
🔎 Strengthening the Black Market:
-
Evidence from Australia’s previous prescription-only model shows that restricting legal access to vapes fuelled the illicit market, where unregulated products were sold without age checks or quality control.
-
The seizure of 60,000 vapes underscores this risk — it highlights demand that the prescription-only model struggles to meet.
🔎 Illicit Market Risks:
-
Black market vapes are more likely to contain harmful contaminants or incorrect nicotine levels, posing a greater risk to public health.
3. Exaggeration of Youth Vaping Threat
🔎 Overstating the Youth Vaping Crisis:
-
While preventing youth vaping is essential, data from both Australian and UK studies show that regular vaping among never-smoker youth is rare, and most youth experimentation is infrequent or short-term.
-
The language used — “threatens the well-being of our young people” — risks amplifying fear rather than encouraging evidence-based strategies.
4. Lack of Support for Harm Reduction Framework
🔎 Absence of Balanced Regulation:
-
Countries like the UK and New Zealand have successfully adopted a regulated retail model where vapes are available in designated outlets with strict age verification, quality control, and product standards. This model encourages safer vaping behaviors while discouraging youth access.
🔎 Evidence-Based Solutions Missing:
-
The Royal College of Physicians, ASH (Action on Smoking and Health), and NHS all advocate for a balanced approach that:
-
Ensures safe vapes are easily accessible to adult smokers.
-
Implements robust education campaigns to reduce youth experimentation.
-
Regulates vape marketing and product standards.
-
5. Overly Harsh Penalties Without Clear Impact
🔎 Heavy Penalties Risk Disproportionate Outcomes:
-
While strict penalties aim to deter illegal activities, they may inadvertently penalize small businesses or individuals who unknowingly violate complex regulations.
🔎 Lack of Evidence on Penalties’ Effectiveness:
-
Harsh penalties alone have limited impact without complementary public health strategies like education campaigns, regulated retail models, and cessation support for smokers.
While the government’s efforts to reduce illicit vape sales are understandable, this crackdown risks neglecting the role of vaping as a key harm reduction strategy. Evidence from Australia’s past enforcement attempts shows that prohibition-style tactics have failed, driving growth in the illicit market and reducing access to safer products for smokers.
For optimal public health outcomes, Australia would benefit from:
-
A regulated retail model for licensed vape sales alongside strict age verification.
-
Education campaigns that highlight vaping as a smoking cessation tool for adults while deterring youth uptake.
-
Product quality control to ensure safe and standardized nicotine levels.
The media release's tone risks promoting fear-based messaging rather than encouraging an evidence-based, balanced strategy that prioritizes both public health and harm reduction.
-
January
Prof Caroline Miller, Director of the Health Policy Centre at SAHMRI on the increase in people vaping – 90,000 in the past three months.
Why Caroline Miller is wrong:
Caroline Miller's claims in the interview contain several misconceptions and inaccuracies regarding vaping. Here’s why she is incorrect based on evidence from leading public health sources:
1. Claim: “We don’t really know the long-term effects of vaping.”
-
Correction: While vaping is a relatively new technology, substantial evidence already indicates it is far less harmful than smoking. Public Health England (now the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities) has consistently stated that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking. The Royal College of Physicians supports this, noting that the risks are unlikely to exceed 5% of those associated with smoking.
-
While long-term data is still accumulating, existing toxicology and epidemiological studies support vaping as a much safer alternative to smoking.
2. Claim: “A lot of vapes contain tobacco.”
-
Correction: This is incorrect. Vapes do not contain tobacco; they contain nicotine, which is extracted from tobacco but does not include the harmful combustion-related toxins found in cigarettes. The harm from smoking comes primarily from combustion, not nicotine itself.
-
Cancer Research UK confirms that e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco and do not produce tar or carbon monoxide, the most harmful components of cigarette smoke.
3. Claim: “People who have never smoked are three times as likely to take up smoking if they start vaping.”
-
Correction: The "gateway theory" is widely debunked. The association between vaping and later smoking is likely due to shared risk factors, not causation. Studies show that most non-smoking youth who experiment with vaping do not go on to become regular smokers.
-
A major review by Public Health England found that vaping is diverting people away from smoking, not towards it.
4. Claim: “Vaping comes with a huge hit of nicotine, which gets people hooked.”
-
Correction: While nicotine is addictive, the level of addiction in vaping is generally lower than smoking. The NHS states that nicotine is relatively harmless on its own and has been used safely in nicotine replacement therapy for years. Moreover, vapers have control over their nicotine intake and can reduce it over time.
5. Claim: “The government is legislating to protect young people.”
-
Correction: Australia’s vaping policies have created a booming black market, making it harder for adult smokers to access regulated products while exposing youth to illicit and unregulated vapes. Countries with regulated retail sales, such as the UK and New Zealand, have lower youth vaping rates than Australia, suggesting that a well-regulated market is more effective than prohibition.
Caroline Miller’s statements reflect a fear-based narrative that misrepresents the science on vaping, ignoring the vast body of research showing that:
-
Vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking.
-
Nicotine itself is not the primary cause of smoking-related diseases.
-
Most vapers are current or former smokers, and vaping is an effective quitting tool.
-
There is no robust evidence that vaping leads to smoking in non-smokers.
-
Banning legal vapes fuels an unregulated black market, worsening youth access issues.
For a balanced, evidence-based perspective, policymakers should look to the UK and New Zealand, where vaping is integrated into smoking cessation programs rather than being criminalized.
-
2023
April
Midwives are pushing for gaping holes in knowledge around e-cigarettes and maternal health to be filled, saying they are struggling to answer questions from their pregnant patients.
May
Vapes with flavours and bright colours will be restricted, and non-prescription vape imports will be more tightly controlled in Australia.
The changes come as part of a host of new measures aimed at restricting the use of vapes in Australia.
In March the New Zealand government finished consultation on proposed measures to crack down on youth vaping.
The SMC gathered expert comment.
Last week, Australian Health Minister Mark Butler announced a major policy shift on vaping, pushing for stronger regulation and enforcement of all e-cigarettes, including new controls on their importation, contents and packaging.
What have they got wrong in this article?
1. Misrepresentation of Australian Vaping Regulations
-
The article states:
“Nicotine-filled vapes are already banned and that all the government is doing is extending this ban to non-nicotine devices.”
What’s wrong with this statement?
-
This misrepresents the situation. Nicotine vapes were already available in Australia via prescription, but the black market flourished due to the restrictive prescription model. The new laws further tighten access, which will likely increase illicit sales, not decrease them.
-
Evidence from the UK and other jurisdictions suggests that a regulated consumer model, rather than prohibition, is more effective at controlling youth access while allowing adult smokers access to harm reduction tools.
-
2. Lack of Context on the Black Market and Disposable vs. Refillable Devices
-
The article states:
"Disposable devices will be banned, it seems that refillable devices will still be available, meaning that people could still find ways to access nicotine 'juice' fairly easily on the black market."
What’s wrong with this statement?
-
The black market exists because of Australia’s restrictive prescription-only model, which has already made illicit sales the dominant supply chain.
-
Countries like the UK and New Zealand, where vaping products are regulated and sold legally, have far lower levels of illicit trade.
-
Banning disposables while keeping refillables is actually a sensible harm reduction move, as it prevents waste and allows better regulation of nicotine levels.
-
3. Downplaying Vaping’s Effectiveness as a Quit Aid
-
The article states:
“Professor Oliver also questions the effectiveness of vapes with helping people quit smoking cigarettes.”
What’s wrong with this statement?
-
The evidence overwhelmingly shows that vaping is the most effective smoking cessation tool available today, outperforming nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in clinical trials.
-
The 2019 New England Journal of Medicine study cited in the article found vaping was twice as effective as NRT, which is highly significant.
-
The NHS, Royal College of Physicians, Cancer Research UK, and other health bodies support vaping as a cessation tool because of this effectiveness.
-
4. Misleading Claim About Nicotine Dependence
-
The article states:
“From my point of view, having nearly 10% of people totally nicotine free is better than having 18% of people transition addicted to e-cigarettes, which probably have more nicotine than a normal cigarette.”
What’s wrong with this statement?
-
Nicotine is not the main cause of smoking-related disease; combustion is.
-
Vaping allows smokers to consume nicotine without the thousands of toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke.
-
The claim that vapes contain more nicotine than cigarettes is misleading. While some e-liquids contain high concentrations of nicotine, users generally self-regulate their intake, and studies show that vaping delivers lower levels of nicotine than cigarettes in most cases.
-
Vaping is less addictive than smoking because it lacks the other reinforcing chemicals in tobacco smoke.
-
5. Overstating the Adequacy of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT)
-
The article states:
"There’s quite a few nicotine replacement products on the market already, and I don’t think that vapes necessarily offer a lot more than patches, sprays and lozenges."
What’s wrong with this statement?
-
NRT has low success rates (5-10%) compared to vaping (50-60% success for those who switch completely).
-
Vaping provides a behavioral replacement for smoking, which NRT lacks, making it more effective.
-
Countries that have promoted vaping for quitting, like the UK and New Zealand, have seen record declines in smoking rates, unlike Australia, where smoking rates are stagnating.
-
Final Verdict
This article misrepresents both the vaping regulations and the science on vaping’s effectiveness as a quit aid. The restrictive policies it supports are actually counterproductive, as they fuel the black market and discourage smokers from switching to a less harmful alternative.
For a more evidence-based perspective, see the Royal College of Physicians, NHS, and Cancer Research UK, all of which affirm vaping’s role in reducing smoking-related harm.
-