No Ifs Just Buts Moh S Vape Ban Needs A Plan

---

 
Letter to Editor
RECENTLY, the Health Minister was quoted in the media as saying that a nationwide ban on vapes and e-cigarettes is no longer a question of “if” but “when”.
Protecting young people from nicotine addiction is a goal we can all agree on. But before moving towards a blanket ban, it is worth recognising that not all smoke-free products are the same, and treating them as one risks undermining public health goals.
Today, policymakers and media often refer to “vapes” as if they are a single product. In reality, there are important differences between closed-system e-cigarettes and open-system vape devices.
The risks they pose are not equal, and ignoring these differences could mean banning products that might actually help adult smokers switch away from traditional cigarettes.
Closed-system e-cigarettes are sealed, pre-filled devices manufactured under strict controls. They are tamper-resistant, consistent in quality, and difficult to modify.
These are the products that adult smokers in countries like Sweden, South Korea, and the United States have used to move away from combustible cigarettes in a more controlled and less harmful way – all under regulation, not prohibition.
Open-system devices, on the other hand, allow users to mix and modify their own liquids. They are far more susceptible to abuse, including the addition of illicit substances.
Many of the drug-laced vape cases in Malaysia have come from such systems. Targeting these high-risk products makes sense, but banning all devices simply because they share a category is like banning both kitchen knives and switchblades on the basis that they are sharp.
It is combustion, not nicotine itself, that causes most smoking-related diseases. When tobacco burns, it produces thousands of harmful chemicals.
Smoke-free products, particularly sealed and well-regulated ones, significantly reduce a user’s exposure to these toxic compounds.
This is why public health authorities such as the US Food and Drug Administration have authorised certain smoke-free products as “appropriate for the protection of public health” after rigorous scientific review.
If Malaysia adopts a one-size-fits-all ban, adult smokers may be driven back to combustible cigarettes or to the black market, where products have no safety standards, no age controls, and no accountability.
That is not harm reduction—it is replacing one public health challenge with another.
A smarter path would be to use the powers already available under the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024.
Closed-system e-cigarettes can be tightly regulated through product registration, packaging rules, and strict age verification. Open systems that pose greater risks should face tighter restrictions, and if necessary, be phased out entirely.
Finally, public communication matters. Suggesting that all nicotine products are equally harmful risks confusing smokers who are trying to make better choices, and may discourage them from switching to less harmful alternatives. That is not just a communications failure—it is a public health failure.
No nicotine product is entirely safe. But some are significantly less harmful than others. If Malaysia is serious about a smoke-free future, the first step is to treat different products differently. Smarter regulation starts with clearer distinctions.
Tan Kim Chuan
Petaling Jaya
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT. 
- Focus Malaysia.

---