Understanding the Rise of Disposable Vapes in Germany
A recent study published in the journal Addiction provides valuable insights into the evolving landscape of e-cigarette use in Germany over the past several years. The researchers, led by Stephanie Klosterhalfen from the Institute of General Practice at the Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, analyzed data from a series of nationally representative surveys conducted between 2016 and 2023. Let’s take a closer look at their key findings and what they mean.
Vaping on the Rise, Driven by Disposables
The study found that overall e-cigarette use among people age 14 and older in Germany has been increasing, reaching an estimated 2.2% of the population by the end of 2023. Interestingly, this growth appears to be largely driven by the rising popularity of disposable vapes.
To understand this trend, it’s helpful to know the three main types of vapes:
- Disposable vapes: Single-use devices that are discarded after the pre-filled e-liquid runs out.
- Pod vapes: Devices that use replaceable, pre-filled pods or cartridges of e-liquid.
- Tank vapes: Devices with refillable tanks that the user fills with e-liquid themselves.
While tank vapes were the most popular type in the earlier years of the study period, their use has declined since 2018. In contrast, the use of disposable vapes has seen a steep rise, particularly since 2022, making them the most commonly used type by the end of 2023 with a prevalence of 0.8%. Pod vape use has also increased steadily in recent years.
The study revealed some interesting differences in the characteristics of users of the three main vape types. Notably, users of disposable vapes tended to be younger on average compared to pod and tank users. Over a quarter (27.7%) of disposable users were under age 25, compared to just 17-19% of pod and tank users.
This age difference was also reflected in the average age at which users started vaping. Disposable users began vaping around 4-5 years earlier on average than pod and tank users.
Table: Sample characteristics, stratified by e-cigarette type (unweighted data).
| Total (n = 1398) | E-cigarette type | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disposable (n = 166) | Pod (n = 331) | Tank (n = 901) | ||
| Age (y) | ||||
| 14–17 | 3.2 (45) | 4.8 (8) | 3.9 (13) | 2.7 (24) |
| 18–24 | 16.4 (229) | 22.9 (38) | 13.6 (45) | 16.2 (146) |
| 25–39 | 36.2 (506) | 36.1 (60) | 35.0 (116) | 36.6 (330) |
| 40+ | 44.2 (618) | 36.1 (60) | 47.4 (157) | 44.5 (401) |
| Sex | ||||
| Male | 58.7 (820) | 47.0 (78) | 49.2 (163) | 64.3 (579) |
| Female | 41.3 (578) | 53.0 (88) | 50.8 (168) | 35.7 (322) |
| Tobacco smoking status | ||||
| Current smoker | 77.7 (1086) | 90.4 (150) | 84.0 (278) | 73.0 (658) |
| Ex-smoker | 15.8 (221) | 3.6 (6) | 11.2 (37) | 19.8 (178) |
| Never smoker | 5.5 (77) | 4.8 (8) | 4.8 (16) | 5.9 (53) |
| Starting age of e-cigarette use (y) | ||||
| 10–13 | 1.0 (14) | 1.8 (3) | 1.2 (4) | 0.8 (7) |
| 14–17 | 7.9 (110) | 13.3 (22) | 10.3 (34) | 6.0 (54) |
| 18–24 | 18.1 (253) | 21.7 (36) | 14.2 (47) | 18.9 (170) |
| 25+ | 65.2 (912) | 47.6 (79) | 66.5 (220) | 68.0 (613) |
| Frequency of vaping during last 30 days | ||||
| Daily | 41.5 (580) | 21.1 (35) | 34.4 (114) | 47.8 (431) |
| Not daily | 55.2 (772) | 71.1 (118) | 61.6 (204) | 49.9 (450) |
| Liquid used per day (mL), median (interquartile range) | 2.0 (5.7) | 1.4 (5.7) | 0.6 (4.4) | 3.0 (5.3) |
| Nicotine concentration of liquid (mg/mL), median (interquartile range) | 4.0 (6.1) | 2.0 (7.8) | 6.0 (6.7) | 4.0 (5.7) |
- Note: Unless stated otherwise, data are presented as column percentages (absolute numbers); sum below 100% because of missing values.
- Total sample of people who reported current use of disposable, pod or tank e-cigarettes.
- For this variable, only 70.0% of the total sample (n = 1270) could be included. Missing data was because of people responding ‘do not know’ (21.2%), or ‘no response’ (8.8%).
- For this variable, only 60.3% of the total sample (n = 1290) could be included in the analysis. Missing data was because of people responding ‘do not know’ (total = 35.9%; in the subgroup of: disposable users = 53.1%, pod user = 53.0%, tank user = 25.8%) or ‘no response’ (total = 3.8%; in the subgroup of: disposable users = 5.0%, pod users = 5.7%, tank users = 2.8%).
Another key finding was that a higher proportion of disposable e-cigarette users also smoked tobacco products (known as dual use) compared to tank users. A staggering 90.4% of disposable users were dual users, versus 73% of tank users.
This suggests that tank e-cigarettes may be more commonly used as a tool for smoking cessation, as evidenced by the higher percentage of former smokers among tank users (20%) than disposable users (4%). Pod e-cigarette users fell in between, with 84% being dual users.
The study also found differences in vaping habits, with only around 1 in 5 disposable e-cigarette users reporting daily use in the past 30 days, compared to roughly 1 in 3 pod users and 1 in 2 tank users. This suggests disposable e-cigarettes may be used more sporadically, perhaps in social settings, rather than as a regular nicotine delivery method like tank devices often are.
Implications and Looking Ahead
The findings from this study provide a detailed picture of the changing patterns of e-cigarette use in Germany. The rising popularity of disposables, especially among younger people, is a trend that warrants close monitoring and further research into the potential public health implications.
The high rates of dual use among disposable e-cigarette users is also concerning, as it means continued exposure to the harms of smoking. Effective strategies are needed to help dual users transition fully away from tobacco products.
While this study fills important knowledge gaps, more research is still needed to understand the drivers behind these shifting use patterns and the long-term health impacts of disposable e-cigarette use. Policymakers should consider targeted interventions, such as restricting flavors that appeal to youth, to curb the uptake of vaping among young people.
Equipping the public with clear, science-based information on the risks and benefits of different e-cigarette types compared to smoking remains crucial. Only by understanding patterns of use and their implications can we design effective public health strategies to maximize benefits and minimize harms.
Related posts:
Scotland Postpones Disposable Vape Ban to June 1, 2025
Zimbabwe Set to Become Regional Hub for Vape Production
UK Government Actively Considers Vape Licensing Scheme
Canadian Vaping Association Warns Flavor Ban Harms Public Health
Italy Imposes Deadline for E-Cigarette Liquids and Flavors Without Tax Stamp
Turkey to Impose Severe Penalties for E-Cigarette Sales and Alcohol Distillation
