Lead, nickel, chromium. This is what was discovered after a laboratory test of used vapes confiscated from Baxter College in KidderminsterA town in Worcestershire, England, with a population of nearly 60,000. , UK. Anyone using them could be inhaling more than twice the daily safe amount of lead and nine times the safe amount of nickel. Tests from lolly flavoured vapes in Australia were also found to contain zinc, arsenicA chemical element which is very poisonous. and formaldehydeA colourless chemical used in many building materials..

VapingUsing an electronic cigarette to breathe in nicotine or other drugs as a vapour. is relatively new. There is still much that we do not know about its long-term effects. Some studies have found that vaping can be harmful to the lungs, especially to young people, whose lungs are still developing.

Last week, pupils from two schools in Hampshire were left needing hospital treatment after vaping left them suffering from accelerated heart rates, confusion and even fits and a loss of consciousness. There have even been reports of illegal vapes exploding, causing serious injuries.

Health experts point out that vaping is a safer alternative to smoking cigarettes. In fact, it is a recommended way for people to quit smoking.

And even though vaping rates among teenagers are rising, most teenagers do not actually vape. A study in 2021 showed that only 9% of UK secondary school pupils between the ages of 11 and 15 vaped occasionally or regularly.

Some are now calling for more to be done about young people buying illegal vapes, which are often importedWhen goods are brought into one country from abroad to be sold. and are not subject to UK safety regulations. The UK government has responded by promising  "tough new measures". This includes the introduction of a new vapes enforcement squad tasked with cracking down on people who sell them to teenagers. Now, ministers are considering a ban on single-use vapes.

But would a ban on vaping help? A ban on disposable vapes, supporters claim, would make it more difficult for children to obtain them. It would also send a message that vaping is not acceptable for children.

Banning negative or harmful behaviours has always been a popular way to try to solve social problems. In some cases, bans can be very effective. For example, the number of smokers in Britain fell by nearly two million in the 10 years following a ban on smoking in public places. Health campaigners hailed an "enormous success".

However, bans can also backfire and make problems worse. In the USA, the era of prohibition in the 1920s did not stop people from drinking alcohol. And the modern "war on drugs" has not stopped American drug deaths from skyrocketing. Instead, critics say bans simply send people underground and lead to an increase in crime and violence.

Today, some argue that a ban on disposable vapes would be ineffective. Under-18s would continue to buy them illegally or simply switch to other forms of vaping or nicotine consumption. A ban would also remove any government regulationWhen governments step in to control what (and how) people buy and sell things. of the products.

The confiscated vapes were not sold legally in the first place - in essence, they are already banned. Instead of banning bad behaviour, some experts believe we should focus on addressing the root causes of the problem. This could include providing education and other resources to help people make better choices. 

Yes: Bans on smoking in public places have been shown to reduce the number of people who smoke and the amount of secondhand smoke exposure.

No: Bans can be ineffective or even counterproductive. For example, the prohibition of alcohol in the United States in the 1920s led to an increase in organised crimePlanned criminal behaviour, often involving lots of people working together over a long time to make money. Organised crime often centres around the sale of illegal drugs. and the production of illegal alcohol.

Or... The effectiveness of a ban on vapes likely depends on how it is implemented. For example, a ban that is also accompanied by an education campaign that is also vigorously enforced is more likely to be effective than a ban on its own.