As harm reduction advocates worldwide continue to navigate the evolving landscape of nicotine alternatives, new research sheds light on a persistent concern: the attractiveness of modern pod-style e-cigarettes. A recent study published in Nicotine and Tobacco Research has added to the conversation. It suggested that pod-based vaping devices may be more more addictive than traditional nicotine replacement therapies like gum—a finding which is not surprising it all, given that the hand to mouth motion involved in vaping, mimics that of smoking.
The pod vape revolution in harm reduction
Electronic cigarettes first entered the public market in 2003, offering a novel alternative to combustible tobacco. However, it wasn’t until the emergence of sleek, pod-based systems like Juul and Elf Bar around a decade later that vaping saw a dramatic surge in popularity—particularly among younger adults and non-smokers. These compact devices introduced a significant innovation: the use of nicotine salts.
Unlike free-base nicotine, which can be harsh at higher concentrations, nicotine salts provide a smoother inhalation experience. This allows for the delivery of higher nicotine levels without the associated throat irritation. While this innovation made vaping more accessible and appealing—especially for those transitioning from traditional cigarettes—it also raised concerns about the potential for increased dependence, particularly among those with no prior history of smoking.
Why pod vapes outperform traditional cessation aids
In an effort to evaluate how pod-style devices compare to nicotine gum in terms of dependency potential, researchers conducted a study involving young adult vapers (under 25 years old) from Morgantown, West Virginia. All participants were regular users of vaping products but had never been cigarette smokers.
After abstaining from nicotine overnight, participants were randomly assigned to use either their usual vape or nicotine gum for 30 minutes. Researchers then measured levels of craving, withdrawal symptoms, and overall satisfaction. The results were telling: pod-based vapes were significantly more effective than both active and placebo nicotine gum at alleviating withdrawal symptoms and reducing cravings. Non-surprisingly, users also reported a higher degree of enjoyment from using their vape devices.
These findings align with what is already known about nicotine salts—they not only enhance nicotine delivery efficiency but also mask bitterness, making the experience more palatable for nicotine-naïve users. The greater satisfaction reported by vapers may help explain why many users—especially those who never smoked—prefer these devices over traditional cessation aids.
Behavioral compensation for low nicotine
Biomarkers from urine samples showed that nicotine exposure levels—measured via cotinine—were similar between the two groups. This suggests that users naturally adjust their behavior based on device characteristics, a phenomenon known as “behavioral compensation.” While POD devices deliver a more concentrated dose, users appear to consume them in smaller quantities. This points to a complex relationship between product design and usage patterns that may not be fully captured by nicotine concentration alone.
In fact, such a pattern has been obsserved in smokers switching to low nicotine cigarettes or vapes, with experts arguuing that forcing low nicotine levels on consumers does not work, as it just drives them to compensate by consuming more.
Rethinking dependence and effectiveness in quitting smoking
The growing presence of nicotine salts in vaping products has not gone unnoticed in Europe. A comprehensive analysis published in BMJ’s Tobacco Control examined market data from 39,030 vaping products registered through the European Union’s Common Entry Gate system. The study found that nicotine salts were present in 13% of all e-liquids but dominated pod-style products, comprising 73% of that category.
The data also revealed that e-liquids containing nicotine salts tend to have higher nicotine concentrations (median of 14 mg/mL for NSIs) and significantly more flavouring agents—particularly fruity and sweet flavours that are more appealing to younger users. Tobacco-flavoured options were less common among nicotine salt products.
This shift in formulation raises legitimate regulatory questions. While nicotine salts make vaping more tolerable and potentially more effective for smoking cessation, they also increase the appeal—and possibly the risk—for those who might otherwise never have used nicotine. Health authorities like the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have warned that nicotine salts enhance nicotine bioavailability, allowing it to cross the blood-brain barrier more effectively.
Striking the right balance
From a harm reduction standpoint, the rise of pod-style vaping presents both opportunity and challenge. On the one hand, these devices may offer smokers a more satisfying and efficient alternative to combustible tobacco—possibly improving quit rates where traditional NRTs have failed. On the other hand, their appeal to youth and non-smokers necessitates careful regulatory oversight.
Rather than blanket bans or flavour prohibitions—which often drive users to illicit markets—policymakers should consider targeted measures that prioritize adult access while curbing youth uptake. This includes strict age verification protocols, educational initiatives, and marketing restrictions that prevent youth-oriented appeal without alienating adult smokers looking to switch.
As more evidence emerges, it’s clear that the nicotine delivery landscape is changing rapidly. Harm reduction strategies must evolve in parallel, informed by nuanced research that distinguishes between risks for youth and benefits for adults. The goal is not to eliminate all nicotine use, but to replace the most harmful forms with safer alternatives—and to do so in a way that acknowledges both public health gains and unintended consequences.
In this context, the conversation about nicotine salts and pod-based vaping devices is not just about addiction; it’s about opportunity—an opportunity to fine-tune our approach to tobacco control, reduce smoking-related deaths, and ensure that innovation in nicotine delivery serves the greater good.