Disposable vape use falling in UK ahead of ban
The popularity of disposable e-cigarettes or vapes has fallen ahead of a UK-wide ban on their sale on 1 June, a study has found.
Researchers believe vape users are switching to refillable and rechargeable vapes in anticipation of the ban.
The percentage of people aged 16-24 who mainly use disposable vapes has dropped by nearly half in the last year from 63% to 35%, according to University College London (UCL) research.
Overall vaping use stalled between January 2024 and 2025 in all adults over 16, after several years of significant growth.
The UK government ban on disposable and single-use vapes is aimed at stopping littering as, in most cases, the vapes cannot be recycled and often end up in landfill or pollute natural environments.
The ban is also aimed at tackling rising rates of youth vaping and protecting children from harm.
The UCL study looked at survey data on vaping habits in England, Wales and Scotland both before and after the ban was announced.
The study used data from the Smoking Toolkit Study, which collected data on 88,611 people aged 16 and over.
Before the ban, between January 2022 and January 2024, vaping among those aged 16 and over went up from 8.9% to 13.5%.
In young adults aged 16-24, usage increased more sharply, from 17% to 26.5%.
After the ban was announced, researchers found a decline in the number of vapers mainly using disposable e-cigarettes - in all age groups and particularly among 16-24 year olds.
The study only asked vape users about their main choice of device.
Dr Sarah Jackson, who works for the UCL Tobacco and Alcohol Research Group and is the lead author of the survey, tells the BBC she thinks "more people are turning to refillable, reusable devices" rather than stopping vaping altogether.
"We often see people change their behaviour in response to impending policy changes before they come into action," she adds.
Disposable vapes are single-use devices, which come pre-filled with vape liquid, whereas refillable and rechargeable (reusable) devices have a longer shelf-life and are often a cheaper way to vape in the long-term.
A reusable vape has vape liquid that can be refilled and a battery that can be recharged.
How are the vaping rules changing?
Dr Jackson adds that vape manufacturers have also been quick to react to the upcoming ban, with "the most popular" disposable brands producing rechargeable versions of their most popular models.
"They're very similar in design, colours, flavours and even price," she says.
While Dr Jackson thinks it's too early to tell whether the government's new strategy will deter young people from vaping, she maintains that health legislators face "an issue of balance".
"We know it makes sense to do something to try and reduce the vast numbers of young people taking up vaping, but the key public health priority here does remain smoking," she says.
"This is vastly more harmful and is killing a lot of people every year, so we need to make sure that any policy measures that are brought in to tackle youth vaping don't put people off using vapes, which are very effective at quitting smoking," she adds.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Girl, 15, in hospital after 'drug-related' incident
A 15-year-old girl is seriously ill in hospital after she collapsed in a "drugs-related" incident. The teenager fell ill at a bus stop on Leeds Road in Allerton Bywater, near Castleford, on Friday evening. West Yorkshire Police were called by hospital staff at about 19:00 BST to report their concerns and the area around the bus stop was cordoned off. There are not thought to be any suspicious circumstances but the incident is believed to be drugs-related, police said. The force added that the girl remained in a serious but stable condition. Anyone with information is being urged to contact police. Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North. West Yorkshire Police
Fast Company
an hour ago
- Fast Company
5 lessons on finding truth in an uncertain world
Adam Kucharski is a professor of epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and an award-winning science writer. His book, The Rules of Contagion, was a Book of the Year in The Times, Guardian, and Financial Times. A mathematician by training, his work on global outbreaks has included Ebola, Zika, and COVID. He has advised multiple governments and health agencies. His writing has appeared in Wired, Observer, and Financial Times, among other outlets, and he has contributed to several documentaries, including BBC's Horizon. What's the big idea? In all arenas of life, there is an endless hunt to find certainty and establish proof. We don't always have the luxury of 'being sure,' and many situations demand decisions be made even when there is insufficient evidence to choose confidently. Every field—from mathematics and tech to law and medicine—has its own methods for proving truth, and what to do when it is out of reach. Professionally and personally, it is important to understand what constitutes proof and how to proceed when facts falter. Below, Adam shares five key insights from his new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. Listen to the audio version—read by Adam himself—in the Next Big Idea App. 1. It is dangerous to assume something is self-evident. In the first draft of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers wrote that 'we hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, that all men are created equal.' But shortly before it was finalized, Benjamin Franklin crossed out the words 'sacred and undeniable,' because they implied divine authority. Instead, he replaced them with the famous line, 'We hold these truths to be self-evident.' The term 'self-evident' was borrowed from mathematics—specifically from Greek geometry. The idea was that there could be a universal truth about equality on which a society could be built. This idea of self-evident, universal truths had shaped mathematics for millennia. But the assumption ended up causing a lot of problems, both in politics and mathematics. In the 19th century, mathematicians started to notice that certain theorems that had been declared 'intuitively obvious' didn't hold up when we considered things that were infinitely large or infinitely small. It seemed 'self-evident' didn't always mean well-evidenced. Meanwhile, in the U.S., supporters of slavery were denying what Abraham Lincoln called the national axioms of equality. In the 1850s, Lincoln (himself a keen amateur mathematician) increasingly came to think of equality as a proposition rather than a self-evident truth. It was something that would need to be proven together as a country. Similarly, mathematicians during this period would move away from assumptions that things were obvious and instead work to find sturdier ground. 2. In practice, proof means balancing too much belief and too much skepticism. If we want to get closer to the truth, there are two errors we must avoid: we don't want to believe things that are false, and we don't want to discount things that are true. It's a challenge that comes up throughout life. But where should we set the bar for evidence? If we're overly skeptical and set it too high, we'll ignore valid claims. But if we set the bar too low, we'll end up accepting many things that aren't true. In the 1760s, the English legal scholar William Blackstone argued that we should work particularly hard to avoid wrongful convictions. As he put it: 'It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.' Benjamin Franklin would later be even more cautious. He suggested that 'it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer.' 'We don't want to believe things that are false, and we don't want to discount things that are true.' But not all societies have agreed with this balance. Some communist regimes in the 20th century declared it better to kill a hundred innocent people than let one truly guilty person walk free. Science and medicine have also developed their own traditions around setting the bar for evidence. Clinical trials are typically designed in a way that penalizes a false positive four times more than a false negative. In other words, we don't want to say a treatment doesn't work when it does, but we really don't want to conclude it works when it doesn't. This ability to converge on a shared reality, even if occasionally flawed, is fundamental for science and medicine. It's also an essential component of democracy and justice. Rather than embracing or shunning everything we see, we must find ways to balance the risk that comes with trusting something to be true. 3. Life is full of 'weak evidence' problems. Science is dedicated to generating results that we can have high confidence in. But often in life, we must make choices without the luxury of extremely strong evidence. We can't, as some early statisticians did, simply remain on the fence if we're not confident either way. Whether we're sitting on a jury or in a boardroom, we face situations where a decision must be made regardless. This is known as the 'weak evidence' problem. For example, it might be very unlikely that a death is just a coincidence. But it also might be very unlikely that a certain person is a murderer. Legal cases are often decided on the basis that weak evidence in favor of the prosecution is more convincing than weak evidence for the defendant. Unfortunately, it can be easy to misinterpret weak evidence. A prominent example is the prosecutor's fallacy. This is a situation where people assume that if it's very unlikely a particular set of events occurred purely by coincidence, that must mean the defendant is very unlikely to be innocent. But to work out the probability of innocence, we can't just focus on the chances of a coincidence. What really matters is whether a guilty explanation is more likely than an innocent one. To navigate law—and life—we must often choose between unlikely explanations, rather than waiting for certainty. 4. Predictions are easier than taking action. If we spot a pattern in data, it can help us make predictions. If ice cream sales increase next month, it's reasonable to predict that heatstroke cases will too. These kinds of patterns can be useful if we want to make predictions, but they're less useful if we want to intervene in some way. The correlation in the data doesn't mean that ice cream causes heatstroke, and crucially, it doesn't tell us how to prevent further illness. 'Often in life, prediction isn't what we really care about.' In science, many problems are framed as prediction tasks because, fundamentally, it's easier than untangling cause and effect. In the field of social psychology, researchers use data to try to predict relationship outcomes. In the world of justice, courts use algorithms to predict whether someone will reoffend. But often in life, prediction isn't what we really care about. Whether we're talking about relationships or crimes, we don't just want to know what is likely to happen—we want to know why it happened and what we can do about it. In short, we need to get at the causes of what we're seeing, rather than settling for predictions. 5. Technology is changing our concept of proof. In 1976, two mathematicians announced the first-ever computer-aided proof. Their discovery meant that, for the first time in history, the mathematical community had to accept a major theorem that they could not verify by hand. However, not everyone initially believed the proof. Maybe the computer had made an error somewhere? Suddenly, mathematicians no longer had total intellectual control; they had to trust a machine. But then something curious happened. While older researchers had been skeptical, younger mathematicians took the opposite view. Why would they trust hundreds of pages of handwritten and hand-checked calculations? Surely a computer would be more accurate, right? Technology is challenging how we view science and proof. In 2024, we saw the AI algorithm AlphaFold make a Nobel Prize-winning discovery in biology. AlphaFold can predict protein structures and their interactions in a way that humans would never have been able to. But these predictions don't necessarily come with traditional biological understanding. Among many scientists, I've noticed a sense of loss when it comes to AI. For people trained in theory and explanation, crunching possibilities with a machine doesn't feel like familiar science. It may even feel like cheating or a placeholder for a better, neater solution that we've yet to find. And yet, there is also an acceptance that this is a valuable new route to knowledge, and the fresh ideas and discoveries it can bring.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mum felt 'alone' on island after boy's diagnosis
A family on the Isle of Man aims to raise awareness about a rare condition that causes their seven-year-old son to have a range of serious seizures at any given time. Lyidan Davies has Dravet Syndrome, a severe form of epilepsy that affects one in 15,000 people in the UK. Alongside frequent, prolonged seizures, symptoms also include developmental delays and several other health issues. His mum Lynda said when Lyidan was first diagnosed, at the age of one, she "felt so alone", unaware of anyone else on the island with the condition. Lyidan had his first fit at eight months old, and at 10 months old had a seizure so severe he was put into an induced coma. Within the first 12 months of his life, Lyidan had been rushed to hospital more than 50 times and was formally diagnosed with Dravet Syndrome a few days before his first birthday. Dad Thomas Davies said he would "never forget" the first time Lyidan had a seizure, when he was in a baby doorway bouncer. When he was first diagnosed he was "in hospital every 10 days", Ms Davies said. "He'd drop into a tonic-clonic seizure and stop breathing. I've had to give him rescue breaths more times than I can count," she said. Some seizures lasted more than three hours, Ms Davies explained. While the condition left the family constantly on the lookout for signs of a seizure, Ms Davies added they coped by taking it "one cup of tea at a time". And despite the regularity of hospital trips and treatments, she said Lyidan had a "great sense of humour" and was "incredibly strong". Mr Davies said he was proud of Lyidan, but also his other two children who acted as carers to their younger brother. Dravet Syndrome UK director Claire Eldred said: "It impacts every part of life. It's a really devastating condition and a life changing diagnosis." She said: "It is really challenging for families to live with on a day to day basis." The charity had been "a huge help" to the family, Ms Davies said, especially in the early days of Lyidan's diagnosis. Throughout May, 25 members of Lyidan's family and friends took part in a 5km (3.1 miles) challenge every day to raise awareness and money for the charity. Read more stories from the Isle of Man on the BBC, watch BBC North West Tonight on BBC iPlayer and follow BBC Isle of Man on Facebook and X. Dravet Syndrome UK
