For years, public conversation around nicotine has been dominated by one word: youth. Every headline, press release, and policy proposal seems to revolve around the fear that a new generation is on the brink of nicotine addiction. But somewhere along the way, the conversation stopped being about evidence and started being about assumptions.
And that’s where the real problem begins.
The Data Doesn’t Match the Panic
If you listen to rhetoric, you’d think youth nicotine use is exploding. But when you actually look at the numbers, a very different story emerges. Youth cigarette smoking is at the lowest level ever recorded. Not just lower than the 1990s or early 2000s—lower than any time since the government started tracking it. Even youth vaping rates, which spiked several years ago, have been declining in recent surveys.
That doesn’t mean youth use is zero, and it doesn’t mean the issue should be ignored. But the idea that we’re facing an unprecedented youth nicotine crisis simply isn’t supported by the long–term trends. In fact, we’re living through the lowest youth smoking rates in modern history.
The Missing Group: Adults Who Still Smoke
While policymakers and activists focus almost exclusively on youth, another group is often left out of the conversation entirely: the millions of adults who still smoke cigarettes.
Cigarettes remain the most dangerous nicotine product by a wide margin. They kill nearly half of their long–term users. They’re responsible for heart disease, lung cancer, COPD, and countless other conditions. Every year, hundreds of thousands of Americans die from smoking–related illnesses. These are not abstract statistics. They represent parents, grandparents, coworkers, and friends.
And yet, many policies treat all nicotine products as if they carry the same level of risk. That approach ignores one of the most basic principles in public health: not all risks
are equal.
are equal.
The Continuum of Risk Is Real
Combustion is what makes cigarettes so deadly. Burning tobacco creates thousands of chemicals, dozens of which are known carcinogens. That’s why cigarettes are so harmful.
Non–combustible products—like nicotine pouches, heated tobacco, or vaping products—don’t involve burning tobacco. That doesn’t make them harmless, but it does make them significantly less harmful than smoking. This is the foundation of tobacco harm reduction: if someone can’t or won’t quit nicotine entirely, switching to a lower–risk product is a meaningful improvement for their health. This isn’t a fringe idea. Countries like Sweden have embraced it. As a result, Sweden now has the lowest smoking rate in Europe and one of the lowest rates of smoking– related disease. They didn’t get there through bans or fear campaigns. They got there by giving smokers alternatives.
Non–combustible products—like nicotine pouches, heated tobacco, or vaping products—don’t involve burning tobacco. That doesn’t make them harmless, but it does make them significantly less harmful than smoking. This is the foundation of tobacco harm reduction: if someone can’t or won’t quit nicotine entirely, switching to a lower–risk product is a meaningful improvement for their health. This isn’t a fringe idea. Countries like Sweden have embraced it. As a result, Sweden now has the lowest smoking rate in Europe and one of the lowest rates of smoking– related disease. They didn’t get there through bans or fear campaigns. They got there by giving smokers alternatives.
The “Ring–Fencing” Argument Falls Apart
One common claim is that alternative nicotine products exist only to keep smokers addicted—to “ring–fence” them, so they never quit.
But real–world evidence tells a different story. Millions of adults have completely stopped smoking by switching to non–combustible products. In the U.K., health authorities openly support vaping as a smoking cessation tool. In Sweden, widespread use of oral nicotine products has coincided with dramatic declines in smoking and smoking–related deaths.
If these products only existed to keep people smoking, we wouldn’t be seeing these outcomes.
If these products only existed to keep people smoking, we wouldn’t be seeing these outcomes.
Youth Protection and Adult Harm Reduction Are Not Opposites
One of the biggest misconceptions in this debate is the idea that you have to choose between protecting youth and helping adult smokers. Both goals can—and should— exist at the same time.
We already have federal laws in place that make it illegal to sell nicotine products to anyone under 21. Enforcement, education, and responsible retail practices are essential. No one in the harm reduction space is arguing otherwise.
But eliminating or severely restricting lower–risk products for adults doesn’t protect youth in a meaningful way. It just leaves millions of smokers with fewer options to move away from the most dangerous form of nicotine.
When Policy Ignores Science
The danger of ignoring youth data is that it leads to policies based on fear rather than facts. When the narrative doesn’t match the evidence, the solutions tend to miss the real problem.
If youth smoking is at historic lows, that’s a success story. It’s something to build on, not a reason to double down on policies that remove safer options for adults. Public health should be about reducing harm wherever possible.
If youth smoking is at historic lows, that’s a success story. It’s something to build on, not a reason to double down on policies that remove safer options for adults. Public health should be about reducing harm wherever possible.
That means:
• Keeping nicotine products out of the hands of minors
• Providing accurate information about relative risks
• Giving adult smokers access to lower–risk alternatives
Those goals are not contradictory. In fact, they reinforce each other.
• Keeping nicotine products out of the hands of minors
• Providing accurate information about relative risks
• Giving adult smokers access to lower–risk alternatives
Those goals are not contradictory. In fact, they reinforce each other.
The Real Question
The real question isn’t whether nicotine is completely safe.
The real question is whether it’s better for someone to smoke cigarettes—or to switch to something significantly less harmful.
For millions of adults, that difference matters. It can mean fewer hospital visits, fewer chronic illnesses, and in many cases, a longer life.
The real question is whether it’s better for someone to smoke cigarettes—or to switch to something significantly less harmful.
For millions of adults, that difference matters. It can mean fewer hospital visits, fewer chronic illnesses, and in many cases, a longer life.
Ignoring youth data and adult needs at the same time doesn’t protect public health. It just creates policies that sound good in headlines but fail in the real world.
And when it comes to something as serious as smoking–related disease, we can’t afford to ignore the evidence.
EN 
EU 
FR_BE 
CS 
NL_NL 
EN_GB 
FR 
IT 
PL 
PT 
ES 
SV 
DE_AU 
DE_DE 
DA 
EL 
FI 
HR 
GA 
MT 
RO