AL Gor 02 February 2025
The statements made by Minister Butler and Minister Picton regarding vaping are alarmist, misleading, and dangerously out of touch with the realities of public health. Their rhetoric relies on sensationalist fear-mongering rather than evidence, and their policies are flawed and likely to do more harm than good. Let’s dissect their claims and expose the truth. I also take a look at the role of the MSM and journalists.
1. Vaping Rates and the “Scourge” of Youth Use
Minister Butler’s claim that vaping has “exploded” among young people, citing a 1000% increase in recent years, is both exaggerated and deliberately inflammatory. The reality is far more nuanced. Yes, vaping has become more popular, but it is not the “scourge” that the government is trying to portray. What they fail to mention is that much of this increase is due to vaping’s popularity as a less harmful alternative to smoking, not as some rampant epidemic among youth.
Instead of acknowledging that many young people are choosing vaping over the far more dangerous habit of smoking, the government wants to frighten parents and communities by equating vaping with cigarettes, which are responsible for the deaths of thousands of Australians every year. The increase in vaping use is merely reflective of the ongoing decline in smoking—something the government should be celebrating, not demonising. Worse still, government policies are exacerbating the problem by pushing vaping into unregulated, black-market spaces where dangerous, untested products flourish.
2. Vaping vs. Smoking: A Gross Misrepresentation
The ministers’ consistent conflation of vaping and smoking is not just misleading it’s dangerously irresponsible. Vaping does not pose the same risks as smoking. Comparing the two means spreading misinformation. Smoking is responsible for millions of deaths worldwide and causes countless diseases, including cancer, heart disease, and lung conditions. In contrast, e-cigarettes contain far fewer toxic substances, and every credible public health organisation from Public Health England to the Royal College of Physicians has affirmed that vaping is far less harmful than smoking.
By grouping vaping together with smoking in their public messaging, the ministers are distorting the facts and dismissing the potential benefits of vaping as a harm-reduction tool. Instead of encouraging smokers to switch to less harmful alternatives, the government is pushing them towards continued tobacco use or back to dangerous, illicit black-market products. This is not public health it’s a missed opportunity to save lives.
3. Vaping as a Gateway to Smoking? A Myth with No Basis
The ministers’ repeated assertion that vaping serves as a “gateway” to smoking is not only unsubstantiated, but it also completely ignores the evidence. The vast majority of young people who vape have never smoked a cigarette. According to numerous studies, the real gateway to smoking is still tobacco itself, not vaping. The ministers’ rhetoric serves only to perpetuate unnecessary fear and hysteria, without considering the growing body of evidence showing that vaping helps adult smokers quit or reduce their tobacco consumption.
Rather than vilifying a harm-reduction alternative, the government should be focusing on policies that make it easier for smokers to switch to a far safer option. Framing vaping as a “gateway” to smoking only serves to obstruct efforts to reduce smoking rates in Australia something that should be a priority for any government.
The latest study released on 30 January 2025 showed -
“For our primary outcome, there was very low certainty evidence suggesting that e-cigarette use and availability were inversely associated with smoking in young people (i.e. as e-cigarettes became more available and/or used more widely, youth smoking rates went down or, conversely, as e-cigarettes were restricted, youth smoking rates went up).”
4. Flawed Policy Responses: Punitive Measures That Will Fail
The government’s recent push to regulate vaping, including limiting legal sales to pharmacies and imposing blanket bans, is not only misguided but downright counterproductive. These policies won’t curb youth vaping; they will only push people to the unregulated, dangerous black market, where the risks associated with vaping are far higher. Youth who can no longer access legal, regulated products will turn to illicit sources, where quality control is nonexistent, and who knows what harmful substances they might inhale.
Rather than taking such draconian measures, the government should be focused on creating a sensible regulatory framework that provides safer, regulated access for adults who want to quit smoking. Instead, their punitive approach punishes those who are trying to improve their health by taking away their access to safer alternatives, while simultaneously failing to address the much larger issue of illegal, unregulated vaping products flooding the market.
5. The Harm Reduction Potential of Vaping: Ignored and Undermined
The ministers seem determined to overlook the real potential of vaping as a harm-reduction tool. Vaping has been proven to be a far less harmful alternative to smoking, and it has already helped thousands of Australians quit smoking or reduce their tobacco consumption. Public Health England and other reputable organisations have endorsed vaping as a viable and far safer alternative to smoking. However, the Australian government refuses to recognise the role vaping can play in saving lives, choosing instead to attack a product that has the potential to improve public health dramatically.
Instead of embracing vaping as a harm reduction strategy, the government is pushing the public into an ideological battle against a product that is proven to be safer than smoking. This is not just harmful; it’s a tragic mistake that puts ideological purity ahead of evidence-based public health strategies. The government’s unwillingness to adopt a balanced, harm-reduction approach is actively undermining the chance to reduce smoking-related deaths in Australia.
6. The Role of Big Tobacco: A Convenient Scapegoat
The ministers’ constant fixation on Big Tobacco’s involvement in the vaping market is a convenient distraction from the real issue at hand. While it’s true that some tobacco companies have entered the vaping space, this is not the root of the problem. These companies should be encouraged to shift away from combustible cigarettes and focus on safer products like vapes, which can help smokers quit. By demonising Big Tobacco’s involvement in vaping, the government is missing an opportunity to regulate this sector to ensure safety and quality standards.
Rather than vilifying companies for attempting to offer a less harmful alternative, the government should focus on robust regulation that ensures only safe, quality-controlled products reach the market. Their current approach is not just ineffective—it’s actively making things worse by driving people to dangerous, unregulated sources.
7. A Misguided, Fear-Based Approach
The ministers’ claims about vaping are rooted in a fear-based approach that is disconnected from the facts. The government continues to act as if vaping is some kind of public health disaster, while completely ignoring the far greater threat of smoking. Their insistence on treating vaping and smoking as the same thing is both scientifically inaccurate and harmful. The government is failing in its duty to protect public health by refusing to support evidence-based harm reduction policies that could save thousands of lives.
Conclusion: A Public Health Disaster in the Making
In conclusion, the government’s approach to vaping is deeply flawed and counterproductive. By relying on alarmist rhetoric, flawed research, and punitive policies, they are actively hindering progress in reducing smoking rates in Australia. Rather than demonising vaping, the government should focus on harm reduction, ensuring that smokers who want to quit have access to safer alternatives. The government’s insistence on pushing these ineffective and ideologically driven policies will only serve to maintain the status quo of smoking-related harm while further entrenching the black market for illicit vaping products.
The ministers’ response to vaping is a perfect example of a government that refuses to adapt to the facts, and as a result, they’re denying Australians the opportunity to improve their health. Their approach is not only misguided; it’s dangerous. If the government continues down this path, it will be responsible for perpetuating the smoking epidemic rather than solving it. The time for change is now, and that change must embrace evidence-based policies, not fear-driven narratives.
Let’s talk about the MSM and Journalists
The Illusion of a Free Press: How Journalists Are Led by the Nose on Vaping
If you ever needed proof that press conferences are carefully stage-managed performances rather than spontaneous exchanges of ideas, look no further than the recent media spectacle on vaping in Australia. The questions asked by journalists weren’t just predictable; they were carefully shaped to ensure the government’s anti-vaping narrative remained unchallenged.
Let’s be clear: journalists weren’t handed scripts to read. But they might as well have been. The illusion of free inquiry is maintained while, in reality, the questions serve as a tool to reinforce official messaging. The government sets the stage, provides the talking points, and the media obediently plays along.
Pre-Programming the Press
Before press events like this, governments and advocacy groups distribute ‘background briefings’—handy little documents that highlight key issues, offer selective statistics, and conveniently omit inconvenient facts. These documents ensure journalists enter the event already primed to ask the ‘right’ kinds of questions. They subtly guide the narrative while maintaining the appearance of objective journalism.
For example, in this latest press conference, not a single journalist asked:
Has youth smoking declined because of vaping?
What independent evidence exists that vaping is causing harm at a population level?
Why are adults who successfully quit smoking using vaping ignored in this debate?
Why is the government shutting down safer nicotine alternatives while allowing deadly cigarettes to remain on every street corner?
Instead, we got pre-approved, leading questions about how ‘young people are quitting’ and how the government is bravely ‘stamping out’ vaping. Predictably, officials parroted their usual lines about the supposed dangers of nicotine, the necessity of early intervention, and the alleged success of their crackdown.
Access Journalism: The Cost of Asking Real Questions
Why don’t journalists push back? Simple: they don’t want to lose access. Those who dare to challenge government narratives find themselves shut out of future press events, denied interviews, and labelled as troublemakers.
Mainstream journalists aren’t rewarded for uncovering the truth; they’re rewarded for staying within the boundaries of what’s ‘acceptable’ to ask. Those who toe the line are granted privileged access, advance briefings, and an easier ride in their careers. Those who don’t? Well, they can shout into the void.
Censorship Through Consensus
Another insidious force at play is the unspoken rule of groupthink. Journalists work in an environment where certain assumptions are simply not questioned. The idea that vaping is a public health crisis, that it must be eradicated, and that Big Tobacco is the only entity pushing nicotine products—these are taken as fact, even when real-world evidence contradicts them.
Journalists aren’t necessarily being coerced into compliance; many are simply following the herd. If you step outside the accepted narrative, you risk ridicule, professional isolation, or being labelled as a ‘shill’ for the vaping industry. The result? Self-censorship is just as effective as government control.
Manufacturing Consent, One Press Conference at a Time
The real scandal isn’t just that the government is misleading the public on vaping—it’s that the media is complicit in it. When journalists fail to ask tough questions, they cease to be watchdogs of power and become their lapdogs.
What we saw in that press conference was not journalism. It was an orchestrated PR exercise, designed to give the illusion of scrutiny while ensuring the government’s narrative goes unchallenged. The questions weren’t probing; they were prompts. The answers weren’t informative; they were scripted soundbites.
And the worst part? The public, trusting the media to hold power to account, will never know what wasn’t asked.
Break the Cycle
If you care about truth in public health, don’t expect it to come from press conferences like these. The government will continue to push its anti-vaping agenda, and the media will continue to play along unless the public demands real answers.