A groundbreaking new study spearheaded by researchers from University College London (UCL) and King’s College London has revealed that the implementation of plain packaging for vape pods significantly diminishes the appeal of vaping among young individuals, while having negligible impact on adult interest. Published in the prestigious journal The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, this study sheds light on how packaging design directly influences youth engagement with vaping products, a crucial insight amid growing concerns over adolescent vaping trends.
The research team conducted an extensive survey involving 2,770 young people aged between 11 and 18 years throughout Great Britain, alongside 3,947 adults aged 18 and older from across the United Kingdom. Participants were shown images of vape pods in two distinct packaging conditions: the commercially branded packaging featuring colorful and appealing designs, and standardized, plain packaging characterized by a stark white background with simple black text. This design strategy aimed to simulate a retail environment stripped of promotional branding to measure its influence on consumer interest.
Crucially, the results showed that over half of the adolescent respondents (53%) believed their peers would be interested in trying vaping products presented in the traditional branded packs. However, when these same products were shown in the standardized plain packages, perceived interest plummeted to just 38%. This substantial reduction underscores the powerful role that visual branding plays in motivating youth to experiment with vaping, emphasizing how packaging not only markets a product but also shapes social perceptions among young people.
Conversely, adult respondents demonstrated a distinct pattern. Their interest in vaping products remained largely consistent regardless of whether the pods were displayed in branded or standardized packaging. This differentiation is particularly important, as it suggests that plain packaging interventions may curb youth experimentation without deterring adults, many of whom may use vaping as a harm reduction tool or smoking cessation aid.
Expanding the scope, the study also explored how different forms of flavor descriptors on standardized packaging influenced interest. Participants were exposed to packages featuring either explicit flavor names such as “Blue Razz Lemonade,” simplified flavor descriptions like “Blueberry Raspberry Lemonade,” or, exclusively for adults, coded flavor labels such as “FR127.” The researchers found that altering flavor descriptions had minimal effect on the interest levels of both age groups, although coded flavor labels slightly decreased interest among adults who neither smoked nor vaped.
This nuanced finding around flavor descriptors is timely, given ongoing regulatory debates concerning whether flavor bans or restrictions can help decrease youth vaping without undermining adult smokers’ transition to vaping. The evidence suggests that plain packaging’s visual simplicity affects young users more profoundly than flavor nomenclature alone, a consideration that could shape future legislative frameworks.
Packaging aesthetics have long been recognized as a critical marketing mechanism in the tobacco and vaping industries. The study highlights the vibrant and often youth-targeted elements found on vape pod packaging, including bright colors and playful motifs, which collectively function to allure adolescents. By contrast, the stark, standardised packs remove this layer of marketing power, rendering the products less eye-catching and socially enticing to young people.
From a public health perspective, this research arrives at a pivotal moment. The UK’s Tobacco and Vapes Bill, under consideration in the House of Lords, proposes to grant unprecedented powers to regulate vape packaging, advertising, product display, and flavorings. Such policy tools are intended to limit the attractiveness of vaping to young people while carefully preserving vaping’s role as a smoking cessation aid for adults. Striking this policy balance remains a complex challenge, as policymakers navigate competing health priorities.
Lead author Dr. Eve Taylor, from UCL’s Department of Behavioural Science & Health and previously affiliated with King’s College London, emphasizes this delicate equilibrium. Dr. Taylor elucidates that the regulatory measures should aim to deter initiation among non-smoking youth without thwarting adults who rely on vaping to quit combustible cigarettes. “Our findings,” she explains, “indicate that packaging regulation could be a viable pathway for achieving this balance, primarily by reducing adolescent appeal while leaving adult interest unaltered.”
Supporting the study, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) has recently reported that 7% of the 11-17 year-old population in Great Britain currently vape — a figure translating to approximately 400,000 adolescents, with daily vaping reported by 40% of these young users. Such numbers alarm public health officials, reinforcing the imperative for effective youth-focused vape control policies.
Methodologically, the study employed rigorous sampling techniques, drawing on data from ASH’s 2024 Youth Survey and conducting a separate adults’ survey representative of the UK’s demographic diversity, including variations in age, sex, and ethnicity. Participants were randomized to observe vaping products under different packaging conditions, enabling the researchers to isolate the effects of branding and descriptor variations on expressed interest.
A noteworthy aspect of the study design was that adolescent respondents were asked about the anticipated interest of their peers rather than their personal interest, a deliberate approach to capture social norms and perceived peer influence, which are known drivers of adolescent behavior. Although the researchers acknowledge that this framing difference between adults and adolescents could affect comparability, prior studies have demonstrated that adolescents’ perceptions of peer interest closely reflect their own behavioral intentions.
The authors also prudently note certain limitations within their sampling framework. Their adult sample contained a higher proportion of current vapers compared to the UK’s general population, potentially inflating observed levels of expressed interest. Despite this, the patterns delineating the impact of packaging remain robust and informative for policy considerations.
Importantly, the study did not find any significant variation in adults’ perception of vaping harm relative to cigarettes as a function of packaging style. This suggests that standardizing packaging is unlikely to shift adults’ risk perceptions, further mitigating concerns that plain packaging regulations could deter smokers from switching to vaping as a less harmful alternative.
The broader implications of this research are profound. Tobacco and vaping companies have historically leveraged packaging to create aspirational and identity-based marketing, targeting youth with eye-catching designs that capitalize on trends and pop culture. By neutralizing these visual appeals through standardized packaging, public health regulators can reduce the gateway effect vaping has on young people, potentially curbing nicotine addiction before it takes root.
Moreover, this study contributes valuable empirical evidence to ongoing global debates about how to effectively regulate emerging nicotine delivery systems while safeguarding harm reduction opportunities. It illustrates that nuanced, evidence-based policies can be crafted to differentiate impact by age group, an essential feature in the evolving tobacco control landscape.
As governments worldwide grapple with the complex dual objectives of reducing youth nicotine uptake and facilitating adult smoking cessation, insights from this UK-based research offer a promising pathway forward. The anticipated enactment of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, informed by these findings, may provide a blueprint for legislation that segments marketing restrictions without compromising therapeutic outcomes linked to vaping.
In conclusion, this high-impact research underscores that packaging is more than mere aesthetics; it is a potent behavioral lever influencing vaping initiation and perceptions. By implementing standardized, plain packaging for vape pods, policymakers could significantly reduce adolescent vaping appeal while maintaining adult smokers’ access to less harmful nicotine alternatives. The findings herald a critical step toward a balanced, evidence-driven approach in public health policy addressing one of the most contentious issues of our time.
Subject of Research: The impact of plain packaging on vape pod appeal among young people versus adults
Article Title: Packaging regulation reduces adolescent vaping appeal without deterring adult smokers, new study finds
News Publication Date: 2025
Web References:
DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101442
References: The Lancet Regional Health – Europe
Keywords: Health and medicine, Human health, Epidemiology, Tobacco control, Vaping regulation, Public health, Smoking cessation, Youth vaping, Packaging regulation
