Political whack-a-mole: The single-use disposable vape ban isn’t fit for purpose
- George Wallace
- Jun 26
- 4 min read

It is rare for legislation to fail so completely that it does not even superficially address the problem it was designed to solve. It is rarer still for a policy to actively exacerbate the issue.
Yet the UK’s ban on single-use disposable vapes has managed both.
Back in January 2024, Rishi Sunak’s government announced that it was going to ban single-use disposable vapes. The policy had two objectives: to tackle “the rise in youth vaping and protect children’s health” and “reduce environmental damage”. The idea was supported by almost 70% of those consulted and, following Sunak’s election loss, the policy was picked up by the new Labour government. The ban took effect on 1 June 2025.
The most pressing issue was tackling vaping in young people. NHS England reported in October 2024 that 9% of 11 to 15-year-olds vape frequently. Action on Smoking and Health, meanwhile, found that 15% of those aged 16 to 17 were active users of e-cigarettes, alongside 18% of 18-year-olds. Young adults were no better, with one out of every seven 18 to 24-year-olds (14%) who had never regularly smoked turning to e-cigarettes. The vast majority of vapes used were disposable: amongst 11 to 17-year-olds, 69% were using disposable vapes. It was clear that, from a public health perspective, something had to change.
With a clear target, simple objectives, logical reasoning, and public support, introducing a policy to curb the damage being done to young people by single-use disposable vapes seemed simple. It would be a challenge to make a mess of such a policy.
A challenge which was duly accepted.
On paper, the legislation introduced appeared straightforward, defining single-use vapes as non-refillable, with a non-rechargeable battery. On the contrary, to qualify as a reusable vape, the product now needs to have a rechargeable battery and a refillable container that holds the vaping e-liquid. At the most basic level, this constitutes a ban.
However, reality is more complicated. By setting the boundary so narrowly, the government essentially offered a blueprint for circumvention. With some elementary level ‘innovation,’ vape companies have embarked on a trivial design exercise to comply with the new regulations. In most cases, this has been as simple as adding a charging port, making the pod removable, and remarketing the products as ‘refillable.’
Take the example of the popular Lost Mary brand. Looking at these devices in comparison before the ban and after their outlaw, there is virtually no difference: the packaging, branding, and model number are the same. The only slight difference is that the previous ‘disposable pod’ labelling has been updated to read ‘prefilled pod kit.’ In terms of the vapes themselves, the simple introduction of a removable pod and charging port has brought these devices within the definition of ‘reusable.’ These changes are the case across the industry.
If that were the end of the policy failure, the policy would be ineffective. But it gets worse.
Money limits children’s and young adults’ access to vaping products. Children don’t typically earn much at all, and young adults are often at the bottom end of the salary scale: the average gross salary of an 18 to 21-year-old in the UK in 2024 is a mere £22,306. With disposable vapes costing between “£4.99 to £6.99 per device” before the ban, it’s quite logical that cost might have been limiting access to single-use disposable vapes.
So naturally, the ban introduced by the government has made these vapes cheaper. Since the ban, users can now buy products like this, which contain refill pods for their ‘prefilled pod kit’ vapes. These pods have the same capacity as an original single-use disposable vape but typically come in packs of two for a similar price to an individual pre-ban unit. In the case of Lost Mary, a refill pod pack can be bought from major supermarkets for £6 each, thereby making each ‘pod’ come at a cost of only £3.
Effectively, the legislation has allowed companies to modify their original products to circumvent the ban, whilst reducing the cost to the end user by around 50%.
The policy will indeed help to address its other aim of curbing environmental damage: 2023 research by Material Focus found that five million disposable vapes were discarded every week. Over a year, the batteries discarded would provide enough lithium for the batteries of 5,000 electric cars. The ban will certainly help to address this.
However, the UK surely cannot value curbing environmental damage if it comes at the expense of legislating properly to protect the health of children and young adults. Yet this seems to be the case.
The GOV.UK page that provides guidance on the ban links to a DEFRA article published on 1 May 2025 to explain “why the UK is banning single-use vapes”. This article hardly mentions the public health aspect. Originally framed entirely around the youth vaping crisis, this explainer article from a month before the ban commenced mentions ‘children’ and ‘young people’ only three times. Only one instance refers to health issues stemming from these products, stating that “most vapes contain nicotine which carries the risk of harm and addiction, especially for young people whose brains are still developing”, completely ignoring any other harmful chemicals these vapes contain. Furthermore, these references are buried amongst a myriad of environmental reasons. This is not the same policy objective that the government first proposed.
Ultimately, the ban is a profound disappointment. At best, it demonstrates lazy policymaking – rushed, under-researched, and lacking the rigour needed to tackle a serious public health issue. At worst, it signals wilful negligence: a government more interested in headlines than outcomes, willing to pass hollow legislation that looks effective on paper but collapses under the slightest scrutiny.
Image: Flickr/Vaping360
No image changes made.
Comments