Published 2025-07-02
Study Warns Against Confusing Vaping with Smoking in Scientific Literature
Researchers are warning against the use of misleading terms like “e-cigarette smoking”, which may harm public understanding and policy on nicotine use.
Key Takeaways
- A study found the misuse of the phrase “e-cigarette smoking” across major scientific databases
- Researchers are concerned that using this term inaccurately equates vaping with traditional smoking
- Using incorrect terminology can negatively impact public understanding and policymaking
- Confusing language can also hinder harm reduction efforts
Misleading Language in Research Raises Concerns
A recent study published in Internal and Emergency Medicine warns that the common phrase “e-cigarette smoking” used in academic literature inaccurately equates vaping with traditional smoking.1
"Despite fundamental differences between e-cigarette use (vaping) and tobacco smoking, terms such as “e-cigarette smoking” have been used to refer to vaping, potentially conflating the two behaviours."
Researchers reviewed thousands of publications from 2015 to 2024 and found that this misleading term is used widely, including in high-impact scientific articles.
Vaping Is Not the Same as Smoking
Vapes, also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), work by heating a liquid to produce an aerosol. In contrast, traditional smoking involves burning tobacco to produce smoke, which contains thousands of chemicals—many of which are harmful.
Despite these differences, many studies and reports continue to blur the lines by calling vaping “e-cigarette smoking.”
The researchers found over 1,800 instances of this term being used across major databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and ScienceDirect. They argue that this confusion in language could affect how the public understands vaping and how policymakers approach nicotine regulation.
Public Health Messages at Risk
Using vague or incorrect terms can make it harder for health professionals and governments to communicate the real risks associated with vaping and smoking.
"Misleading terminology can contribute to distorted understandings of nicotine dependence, complicate harm reduction strategies, and risk shaping restrictive policies that fail to differentiate e-cigarette use from smoking."
For example, in the UK, health authorities have stated that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and may help smokers quit. But if vaping is wrongly equated with smoking, people may not recognise the difference. This can lead to poor health choices or a reluctance to switch from smoking.
The authors say this confusion could also impact how teachers, parents, and doctors talk to young people about the dangers of nicotine. Without clear language, efforts to reduce addiction and prevent harm may fall short.
A Call for Clear and Consistent Terminology
The study’s authors urge scientists, health agencies, and media to use accurate terms when referring to vaping. They recommend stopping the use of the phrase “e-cigarette smoking” altogether and instead using terms that clearly reflect the behaviour, like “vaping” or “e-cigarette use.”
In short, they believe that improving the language used in research and public health communication is a simple but powerful step toward better policy, education, and outcomes for public health.
Resources
1. “‘E-cigarette smoking’ is a misleading term: a critical review of its use in academic literature.” Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi, Nafisat Dasola Jimoh and Chimwemwe Ngoma. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11739-025-04014-1
Related articles
