Walk into any conversation about vaping today, and you will hear two very different stories. One says vaping helped millions of smokers finally quit. The other says it is just as bad as smoking, maybe worse. Both stories cannot be true. So which one does the evidence actually support?
New 2026 data from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) gives us a clear, if uncomfortable, answer. Public belief about vaping has never been further from the science. That gap matters, because it stops smokers from switching to something safer. Let us walk through exactly what the facts say, and clear up the myths along the way.
The risk-perception gap, in numbers
ASH surveyed more than 13,000 UK adults for its 2026 Smokefree GB survey, and the results are striking. 54% of UK adults now believe vaping is as harmful as smoking, or worse. Among smokers, that figure sits at 52%. Among smokers who have never tried vaping, it climbs to 61%. Fewer than a third of smokers correctly believe vaping is less harmful.
Here is why that trend stings. A decade ago, only a quarter of UK adults held that same mistaken belief. Public understanding has moved backwards, not forwards, even as the science has grown stronger. One UCL researcher called it “a depressing state of affairs.” He is not wrong.
So what does the evidence actually say?
Let us separate belief from evidence, because the two have clearly drifted apart.
The most-cited figure comes from a 2015 Public Health England review. It estimated that vaping is around 95% less harmful than smoking. That number has since travelled the world, and it still holds up reasonably well. But it is not the only word on the subject.
In 2022, scientists at King's College London reviewed the evidence for the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID). They concluded that vaping exposes users to “a small fraction of the risks of smoking” in the short and medium term. Smokers who switched to vaping showed roughly an 80% reduction in biomarkers linked to toxic exposure. That figure comes from research published in Nicotine & Tobacco Research.
Then, in 2024, the Royal College of Physicians published its own evidence review. Its conclusion was blunt. There is “clear evidence that e-cigarettes cause less harm to health than combustible tobacco.” Three separate, independent reviews all point the same direction.
Why the difference in phrasing between reviews? Smoking burns tobacco, and that combustion creates thousands of chemicals, including tar and carbon monoxide. Vaping heats a liquid instead, so it skips combustion entirely and avoids most of those by-products. That is the mechanism behind every one of these findings, not marketing spin.
Where does the misinformation come from?
If the evidence is this consistent, why do so many people believe the opposite? ASH points to one big factor: media coverage. Reporting often highlights individual studies that flag a possible risk. It rarely places that risk alongside the far larger, well-documented harms of smoking. Read enough headlines in isolation, and vaping starts to sound just as dangerous. Read the full body of evidence, and a very different picture appears.
Social media adds to the confusion, since dramatic anecdotes travel faster than balanced summaries. None of this means vaping deserves a free pass. It means the conversation deserves more context than it currently gets.
Let's be clear: vaping is not risk-free
Getting the comparison right cuts both ways. Vaping is not risk-free, and nobody serious claims otherwise. It still delivers nicotine, which is addictive. And long-term data covering several decades simply does not exist yet, since vaping has not been around that long.
Current guidance is consistent on this point. Non-smokers, especially young people, should not start vaping. Pregnant women should speak with a healthcare professional before using any nicotine product. And every My Vapery product carries the same standing rule: 18+ only, no exceptions.
So the accurate claim is not “vaping is safe.” The accurate claim is “vaping is substantially less harmful than smoking.” That distinction matters enormously if you smoke and are weighing up what to do next.
Why the misperception has real consequences
This is not an abstract debate. Roughly 60% of adults who currently vape in Great Britain used to smoke and have since quit, according to ASH. Vaping remains the most popular quitting aid in England, ahead of patches, gum and willpower alone.
Yet misperception holds people back. Smokers who wrongly believe vaping is just as harmful are, understandably, far less likely to try switching. Some even report going back to cigarettes because they doubted vaping would help. That is the real-world cost of a myth left unchallenged. Getting the facts right is not just an academic exercise. It is a genuine public health opportunity, and one that a well-informed retailer is well placed to support.
Quick myths, quickly busted
-
Myth: Vaping is just as harmful as smoking.
Fact: three independent UK reviews agree vaping carries only a small fraction of smoking's risk. -
Myth: Nobody really knows the long-term effects.
Fact: that's true for multi-decade outcomes. Short and medium-term biomarker evidence already shows much lower toxic exposure among people who switch. -
Myth: If it's not “safe,” there's no point switching.
Fact: the relevant comparison isn't vaping versus nothing. It's vaping versus continuing to smoke, and the evidence is decisive there. -
Myth: All the studies disagree.
Fact: Public Health England, King's College London/OHID and the Royal College of Physicians reached the same broad conclusion, years apart and using different methods.
The takeaway
The evidence has not changed direction. Public belief has, and the two have drifted further apart than at any point since ASH began tracking this question. That gap is exactly why trustworthy information matters as much as trustworthy stock.
At My Vapery, we built our name on being genuine, tested and fully compliant. Good decisions start with good information. Whichever brand or flavour you explore, we would rather you choose with the real facts in hand, not a headline stripped of its context.
