Flavor Bans Revisited: What the Evidence Now Shows—Three Years Later
Three years of data from jurisdictions that implemented flavor bans: youth vaping declined, adult smoking may have increased, and the net public health effect remains uncertain. The flavor ban experiment is producing results. The results are more nuanced than either side expected.
San Francisco banned flavored vaping products in 2018. The result: youth vaping declined, but youth smoking increased—the first increase in the city in over a decade. Massachusetts banned all flavored tobacco products in 2019. The result: cigarette sales increased following the ban, reversing a years-long decline. **Three years of data from multiple jurisdictions tell a consistent story: flavor bans reduce youth vaping, but they may increase smoking—among both youth and adults—by eliminating the products that make vaping an effective alternative. The net public health effect depends on the balance between these two effects—and the balance is uncertain.**
**The flavor ban debate has been conducted as if the effects were known in advance—as if the only question were whether to protect youth or protect adults. The evidence, three years in, suggests that the effects are more complex: flavor bans affect youth and adults, smoking and vaping, in ways that vary by jurisdiction, by the availability of alternatives, and by the characteristics of the population. The policy question is not 'should we ban flavors?' It's 'under what conditions do flavor bans produce net public health benefits—and under what conditions do they cause net harm?'**
