A new economics study looked at what happened when Canadian provinces banned or restricted flavored vape (e-cigarette) sales between 2018 and 2023. The study covered 9 provinces and 516 province-month observations.
Key Takeaways#
Flavored vape sales collapsed almost completely, as expected.
But cigarette sales went up — about 9.6% higher in provinces with flavor bans, and possibly as much as 21.5% under a different statistical method.
People didn’t quit nicotine when flavors disappeared — many appear to have switched to either unflavored vapes or, more worryingly, ordinary cigarettes.
This matches similar findings in the United States, suggesting the pattern isn’t unique to one country’s regulatory culture.
What the Study Actually Did#
Researchers Brad Davis, Abigail Friedman, and Michael Pesko analyzed five years of real sales data — not surveys, but actual wholesale cigarette shipments and retail vape purchases — across Canadian provinces. Some provinces (like Nova Scotia, British Columbia, and Ontario) restricted or banned flavored vapes during this period. Others (like Alberta and Quebec) did not.
By comparing sales trends in “banned” provinces to “non-banned” provinces before and after each policy took effect, the researchers could isolate the effect of the flavor restrictions themselves, separate from other nationwide trends like COVID-19 or general declines in smoking.
Why This Matters#
Flavor bans on vapes are usually passed with a clear goal: making vaping less appealing to teenagers and reducing nicotine addiction overall. That’s a reasonable goal — flavors like cotton candy or mango are widely seen as a draw for younger users.
But nicotine products don’t exist in a vacuum. If vaping becomes harder or less appealing, some people who were vaping instead of smoking may go back to — or start — smoking cigarettes. Cigarettes are far more dangerous than vaping; smoking is estimated to cut life expectancy by several years, while the average public health expert views vaping as roughly a third as harmful as smoking. So if a policy meant to reduce vaping accidentally pushes people toward cigarettes, it could do more harm than good, even if it succeeds in cutting vaping rates.
What They Found#
Vaping dropped sharply — but not evenly. Sales of flavored (non-menthol) vapes fell by about 99.9% in provinces with restrictions, and menthol vape sales fell by roughly 97%. That’s about as complete a collapse as a market can have.
Unflavored and tobacco-flavored vapes went up instead. In gas stations and convenience stores, sales of unflavored/tobacco-flavored vapes rose about 123% in restricted provinces — suggesting many vapers didn’t quit, they just switched to whatever flavor was still legal. Provinces that also banned menthol vapes (BC, the Maritimes) saw much larger substitution toward tobacco/unflavored vapes (464.8% and 711.1%) than provinces that exempted menthol (Saskatchewan, Ontario), which showed no significant substitution at all.
Interest in vaping declined too, not just purchases. Google searches for vape shops and vape-buying terms dropped in the restricted provinces, suggesting people weren’t simply driving to a specialty vape shop to keep buying flavors — the overall interest in vaping fell.
But cigarette sales rose!!! This is the headline finding: cigarette sales increased by about 9.6% in provinces that restricted flavored vapes, compared to provinces that didn’t. Using an alternative statistical model (called “synthetic difference-in-differences”), the estimated increase was even larger — about 21.5%. The effect wasn’t immediate; it built up gradually, becoming clearly noticeable after about 10 months. The authors estimated the vape-sales decline corresponded to roughly 2.7–10.6 mg less nicotine absorbed per capita per month, while the cigarette-sales increase corresponded to roughly 5.5–11.0 mg more — i.e., the increase in cigarette-sourced nicotine is of similar magnitude to the vape-sourced decline.
Do flavor restrictions increase smoking in other countries too?#
Yes. Similar studies in the United States have found the same basic pattern: when a state or city bans flavored vapes, cigarette sales tend to rise. Interestingly, the effect in Canada was somewhat smaller than in the U.S. (a ~30% drop in vape sales in Canada versus a much larger drop found in comparable U.S. research). One possible reason: Canada already has strict tobacco rules — like a national ban on menthol cigarettes — so Canadian smokers have fewer “flavored cigarette” options to switch to, which may partly offset the substitution effect toward cigarettes.
Limitations Worth Knowing#
- The data track sales, not necessarily who is buying or how much any one person is smoking or vaping. It can’t separate youth from adult behavior.
- Canada has an unofficial market for cigarettes and vapes (contraband/illegal sales) that isn’t captured in this data, so real-world use might differ somewhat from what official sales suggest.
- Some of the cigarette-sales results were sensitive to which statistical model was used, and the researchers themselves flagged some uncertainty in the early event-study trends.
Bottom Line#
Canada’s experience adds real-world weight to a pattern already seen in the U.S.: restricting flavored vapes sharply cuts vaping, but a meaningful share of that decline shows up elsewhere — as more cigarette sales. The authors’ conclusion isn’t that flavor bans are pointless, but that their side effects on smoking deserve serious weight when these policies are designed and judged, not just their effect on vaping alone.
Frequently Asked Questions#
Did flavor bans reduce overall vaping in Canada? Yes — flavored vape sales fell dramatically, and interest in vaping (measured through search activity) also declined. But it appeared to lead to more smoking.
Did flavor bans increase cigarette smoking? The sales data suggest yes: cigarette sales rose meaningfully in provinces that restricted flavored vapes, compared to provinces that didn’t. Considering that illict sales were not tracked, it cannot be excluded that the increase in smoking consumption is even higher.
Are flavor bans for non-combustible nicotine products a bad policy? While the study doesn’t make that call outright, the authors argue that if a policy reduces a less-harmful product (vaping) while increasing a far more dangerous one (smoking), it could end up hurting public health overall rather than helping it — a genuine trade-off policymakers should weigh carefully.
What should a policymaker do on the issue of flavor bans in Tobacco Harm Redution? The authors’ own conclusion is narrower than a simple “ban flavors” or “don’t ban flavors” verdict: they argue that policymakers should proceed cautiously with flavor restrictions, because the harm from an unintended rise in cigarette smoking could outweigh the public health benefit of reduced vaping. In other words, the paper isn’t weighing youth protection against adult health as if one has to lose — it’s pointing out that this particular policy tool appears to have a side effect (more adults smoking) that works against the policy’s own underlying public health goal, which is worth factoring into how the policy is designed or evaluated.
Source: Davis, B. A., Friedman, A. S., & Pesko, M. F. (2026). Restricting Sales of Flavored Nicotine Vaping Products: Effects on Nicotine Vaping Product and Cigarette Sales in Canada. Working paper. Data: Health Canada wholesale cigarette shipment records and NielsenIQ retail vape sales data, July 2018–June 2023.
