Researchers from the University of Wollongong lead the charge for vaping policy change and regulation

Can you describe how your research on vaping products has influenced the development of vaping policy in NSW and at the federal level? What key challenges did you face when translating scientific findings into actionable policy recommendations?

Dr Celine Kelso: Our research, focused on the chemical content of vaping products, came at a critical time around the introduction of the federal vaping regulation. The findings demonstrated that improved regulation of vaping contents was needed due to inaccurate labelling of products and the inclusion of dangerous contaminants.

At the state level, our partnership with NSW Health influenced the government’s decision to redirect NSW state funds (AUD$6.8 M) for the implementation of increased state vaping enforcement efforts, as well as the expansion of awareness programs to educate young people in NSW on the risks associated with vaping. We were also invited to address the NSW Government Parliamentary Inquiry into E-cigarette Regulation and Compliance, with our findings directly incorporated into recommendations from this enquiry.

A key challenge throughout was to ensure our research findings were presented clearly and compellingly, providing critical details for a general audience without room for misinterpretation.

Your collaboration with NSW Health has led to the analysis of over 1200 vaping products. What have been some of the most surprising or concerning findings from this extensive data, and how have these findings shaped public health messaging and policy around vaping?

Dr Celine Kelso: Several findings from the study conducted in partnership with NSW Health were noteworthy. This project showed that over 98% of samples confiscated during NSW enforcement efforts contained nicotine, many of them with no mention of the nicotine on their packaging, and were therefore being sold illegally over the counter. Analysis of devices directly confiscated from high school students showed that 97.5% contained nicotine and that 23% showed signs of product tampering, likely in an attempt to refill or recharge disposable devices. Prohibited ingredients with known adverse health effects were present in 3.4% of samples analysed, such as ethylene glycol (anti-freeze).

These findings were disseminated through infographics by NSW Health. They shaped public health messaging through the implementation of awareness programs aimed at educating young people in NSW about the risks associated with vaping and offered support for vaping cessation programs.

As early to mid-career researchers, how have you navigated the complexities of working in such a politically charged area, particularly when it comes to balancing scientific integrity with public and media interest?

Dr Celine Kelso: We recognise that there are many polarising views in this space, leading to fierce debate in the media and online between pro- and anti-vaping groups. Working in a tobacco-related field comes with added complexities. It is essential to remain completely independent from tobacco companies or product subsidies to ensure the integrity of the evidence gathered and its potential impact.

Faced with these complexities, we, as scientists, made a conscious decision from the start to base our public messaging on the data and scientific evidence from our research. This also applies to the traditional and social media stories we participate in, as we continue to present our findings in a way that is accessible to a general audience while remaining evidence-based.

Your research has garnered significant media attention. How do you manage the public visibility of your work, and what impact do you believe this media exposure has had on both public opinion and policymaking? What benefits has this exposure brought to your research and others in this space?

Dr Jody Moller: Managing the public visibility of our research requires a balance between accessibility and accuracy. Engaging with both Australian and global media platforms has allowed Dr Kelso and me to communicate complex scientific concepts in a way that connects with diverse audiences. We prioritise clear, evidence-based messaging while ensuring that the nuances of our work are not oversimplified.

The impact of this media exposure has been profound. It has not only heightened public awareness of issues around e-cigarettes in Australia but also influenced policy discussions by providing decision-makers with credible, research-driven insights.

By translating scientific findings into digestible content, I have seen an increase in public engagement and advocacy, leading to meaningful dialogue about e-cigarette regulation in Australia. This visibility has benefited our research by attracting new collaborators, securing funding opportunities, and inspiring the next generation of scientists.

Given the ongoing debates around vaping in Australia, where do you see the field of vaping research heading in the next few years? Are there any emerging trends or areas of concern that policymakers should be paying closer attention to?

Dr Jody Moller: Moving forward, vaping research in Australia will need to focus on the unintended consequences of stricter regulations, particularly the shift of nicotine vaping products into the black market. As access to regulated products decreases, unregulated alternatives may contain dangerous contaminants, posing significant health risks. This raises urgent concerns about product safety and enforcement challenges that policymakers must address.

Another emerging trend is the increasing use of alternative nicotine products, such as nicotine pouches and pearls. As these products grow in popularity, research must examine their long-term health effects and potential for dependence, especially among young users. Finally, as more individuals who have never smoked begin vaping, we have a growing opportunity to collect clearer data on the direct health impacts of e-cigarettes. This evidence will be critical in shaping harm reduction strategies, refining regulations, and ensuring public health policies are grounded in scientific research.