Recent seizures reveal a dangerous truth: banning safer alternatives doesn’t eliminate risk, it hands control to unregulated criminal markets.
Authorities across the globe have long been sounding the alarm about the concerning circulation of illicit vaping products containing cannabis, synthetic opioids, and other adulterants. Recent cases in Bradford in the UK and new seizure data from Belgium illustrate a problem that should concern everyone, especially those who genuinely support tobacco harm reduction (THR). While officials often frame these incidents as proof that vaping itself is dangerous, the evidence points to a different conclusion: prohibition and restrictive bans are driving products underground, where they become unregulated, unpredictable, and genuinely hazardous.
The real story behind dangerous vapes
In Bradford, UK, police and Trading Standards officers have reported a surge in illegal cannabis-infused vape products, many sold alongside illicit tobacco. During a recent licensing hearing, authorities described raids on off-licences where suspected THC vapes were seized and linked to broader criminal activity, ultimately leading to the loss of an alcohol licence for one retailer.
These products are illegal for recreational use in the UK, yet they are increasingly available. Why? Demand has not disappeared—only legal supply has. When markets are pushed outside regulatory oversight, criminal actors step in. The result is not consumer protection, but consumer risk.
Health officials are particularly concerned about youth access. Liquid THC vapes are discreet, often odourless, and easy to conceal. Trading Standards officers reported emergency services being called to schools after students used these vapes during breaks, with some cases requiring hospital treatment. Even more worrying, some seized products reportedly contained traces of synthetic cannabinoids such as Spice, dramatically increasing the risk profile.
Drug support organisations warn that vaping cannabis can lead users, especially inexperienced adolescents, to underestimate dosage. Unlike smoking, where combustion and smell provide cues, vaping allows rapid and repeated consumption, increasing the risk of acute adverse reactions. Again, these harms are not inherent to regulated nicotine vaping products used by adults for smoking cessation; they are the result of unregulated substances sold illegally.
A worst case scenario
Belgium offers an even starker example of what happens when illicit markets flourish. According to the country’s drug commissioner, Ine Van Wymersch, more than 80 percent of illegal refillable vape pods seized by authorities now contain synthetic opioids. These substances are impossible to detect by smell or appearance, creating a frightening scenario in which teenagers may unknowingly inhale highly addictive and dangerous drugs.
Once again, these are not products bought from licensed vape shops adhering to product standards. They are illegal capsules circulating precisely because there is no regulated pathway for safer alternatives in certain markets, or because existing restrictions have made compliant businesses unviable.
Real-world evidence
Independent studies and investigations over the past decade consistently show that the most serious vaping-related harms are associated with illicit or adulterated products. The 2019 EVALI outbreak in the United States, for example, was ultimately linked to vitamin E acetate in illegal THC cartridges, not to regulated nicotine e-liquids. Public health agencies, including the CDC, later acknowledged that nicotine vaping products sold legally were not the cause.
Similarly, research published in journals such as Addiction and Drug and Alcohol Dependence has highlighted how prohibition increases the likelihood of contamination, variable potency, and consumer misinformation. When products are made clandestinely, there are no incentives for quality control, accurate labelling, or age verification.
How sweeping bans feed the problem
In response to these dangers, some policymakers have doubled down on bans, particularly flavour bans, feeding a vicious cycle. For instance, Belgium’s health minister is pushing for one of Europe’s toughest prohibitions on flavoured vapes, arguing that fruit and candy profiles attract youth and are exploited by criminal groups. But this of course would only exacerbate the problem.
Besides the fact that from a THR perspective, this approach is deeply flawed, as flavours are one of the key reasons adult smokers successfully switch to safer alternatives. Removing them from the legal market does not eliminate demand; it simply shifts it to illegal suppliers, the same networks now selling opioid-laced pods.
Multiple surveys, including those by Public Health England (now the UK Health Security Agency) and the Cochrane Collaboration, have found that flavoured vapes significantly improve smoking cessation outcomes for adults. Ignoring this evidence risks sacrificing public health gains while empowering organised crime.
Why products become unsafe and how to fix it
Unsafe vaping products tend to emerge when several risk factors converge. Prohibition and excessive regulation can eliminate legal supply chains, creating gaps in the market that are quickly filled by illicit operators. Another factor could be the absence of clear and enforceable product standards, such as requirements for ingredient disclosure and independent testing, there is little to prevent unsafe or contaminated products from reaching consumers.
Criminal incentives further compound the problem, as illegal producers are driven by profit rather than consumer safety, with no accountability for harm caused. Finally, poor consumer education leaves users (particularly young people) unable to distinguish between regulated products and illicit ones, increasing the likelihood that they will unknowingly use dangerous or adulterated vapes.
The solutions are well known to harm reduction advocates. Governments should implement proportionate regulation that allows legal, affordable, and appealing alternatives to smoking. This includes enforcing manufacturing standards, requiring independent lab testing, mandating clear labelling, and licensing retailers with strict age verification.
Equally important is targeted enforcement against truly dangerous products, for example those containing THC, synthetic cannabinoids, or opioids, rather than blanket crackdowns on nicotine vaping. Education campaigns should clearly distinguish between regulated harm reduction products and illicit drugs masquerading as vapes.
Sensible regulations not prohibition
The situations in Bradford and Belgium are not arguments against vaping; they are warnings about what happens when policy ignores harm reduction principles. By pushing products underground, bans create the very dangers they claim to prevent. A regulated market, informed consumers, and evidence-based policy remain the most effective tools to protect young people while helping adult smokers move away from combustible tobacco. The message is clear: safety comes from regulation, not prohibition.