Does Vaping Cause Cancer? What Human Studies Can and Cannot Tell Us

Vaping has not been proven to cause cancer in humans, but it is not risk-free. E-cigarette aerosol contains known carcinogens at far lower levels than cigarette smoke. People who vape carry higher levels of some cancer-linked chemicals than people who have never used tobacco. In 2026 a study of 4.5 million Korean adults linked vaping after quitting smoking to a higher risk of lung cancer.

The accurate answer sits between two loud claims. Vape aerosol is not "just water vapor" and vaping is not "as deadly as smoking." This guide sorts the evidence into what is proven, what is plausible and what nobody can know yet. It draws on 2026 cohort studies, laboratory and animal research and the published positions of the WHO, the US National Academies, the NHS and leading cancer bodies. The question matters in Pakistan, where the 2014 Global Adult Tobacco Survey counted 15.6 million adults who smoke.

The short answer

• Proven: vape aerosol delivers measurable carcinogens such as formaldehyde, acrolein, tobacco-specific nitrosamines and metals. Levels are far lower than in cigarette smoke but higher than in clean air.
• Plausible: DNA damage in vapers' mouth cells, smoker-like DNA changes and lung tumors in mice make a long-term risk of lung and oral cancer biologically plausible.
• Not yet known: how many cancers, if any, vaping causes in people who never smoked. Cancer latency varies, and long-term studies of exclusive vaping remain limited.
• What to do: if you do not smoke, do not start. If you smoke, quitting all nicotine is best and switching completely beats smoking. Vaping while still smoking does not deliver the same drop in exposure.

In this guide

1. What the evidence says
2. What human studies found
3. Carcinogens in vape aerosol
4. DNA damage and precancerous changes
5. Does nicotine cause cancer?
6. Vaping vs smoking
7. Why long-term risk is hard to measure
8. How to read a vaping and cancer headline
9. What health authorities say
10. Common myths
11. What to do now
12. FAQs
13. The verdict
14. Sources

What does the evidence say about vaping and cancer?

The evidence proves that vaping exposes users to carcinogens and shows early biological damage. It stops short of proving that vaping causes cancer in people. Scientists weigh cancer risk on three levels: what a product releases, what it does to cells and what happens to large groups of people over decades. Vaping has strong data on the first two levels and only early data on the third.

Vaping and cancer: the evidence at a glance

What have human studies found about vaping and cancer?

Human studies so far link vaping to cancer risk mainly in people who also smoked. None has followed never-smokers long enough to settle the question. Cancer may develop years or decades after an exposure, depending on the cancer and other factors, while e-cigarettes only became popular after 2010. Most adult vapers are former or current smokers, so their risk carries years of tobacco smoke.

Survey studies add a trap called reverse causation. People who feel unwell or have been warned by a doctor often switch to vaping to quit smoking. That can make vaping look more harmful than it is. The strongest studies follow people forward in time and compare like with like, such as former smokers who vape against former smokers who do not.

The 2026 Korean study of 4.5 million adults

Former smokers who vaped after quitting had a 56% higher risk of lung cancer than former smokers who did not vape (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56). Kim and colleagues followed 4,524,895 South Korean adults with a smoking history from national health screening in 2018 through December 2023 (Nature Medicine, 2026). Vaping after quitting was also linked to twice the risk of dying from lung cancer (aHR 2.00) and 22% higher all-cause mortality (aHR 1.22).

The same data show why the comparison group matters. Against people who kept smoking, former smokers who vaped had 23% lower all-cause mortality (aHR 0.77). Their lung cancer risk was only about 12% lower than that of continuing smokers, a gap that was not statistically significant. The authors concluded that vaping after quitting "may attenuate lung cancer-specific benefits of cessation" and stated that causality cannot be established. Vaping was self-reported. A follow-up of roughly five years is also short for lung cancer.

Other human studies

• Smokers with COPD: among 23,262 Korean adults who smoked when diagnosed with COPD, quitting lowered lung cancer risk by 15% (aHR 0.85). Switching to e-cigarettes did not significantly lower it (aHR 0.94), although switchers had 20% fewer major heart and stroke events (Kim et al., Respiratory Research, 2026).
• Smokers with hepatitis B: among 127,196 Korean smokers with chronic hepatitis B, switching to e-cigarettes and quitting were each linked to about 22% lower liver cancer risk than continued smoking (aHR 0.78 for both). People who stayed quit fared best (aHR 0.64 vs 0.73 for consistent switchers), but that gap was not statistically significant (Song et al., Preventive Medicine, 2026).
• Adults under 50: in a case-control study of 256 lung cancer patients and 2,921 cancer-free controls at Ohio State University, people who both smoked and vaped had 13.8 times the odds of early-onset lung cancer compared with nonsmokers. People who only smoked had 5.0 times the odds. The study could not adjust for pack-years, had only 20 dual-use cases and reported no separate result for vaping alone (Bittoni et al., Frontiers in Oncology, 2026).
• A two-year Italian cohort: among 1,355 adults who vaped, smoked or did both, cancer diagnoses did not differ significantly after 24 months. The authors called their safety data preliminary (Manzoli et al., Tobacco Control, 2017).
• Breast cancer patients: a 2025 commentary analyzing the US All of Us Research Program found that breast cancer patients who vaped reached metastasis sooner on average than non-users (188 vs 926 days). The comparison was unadjusted and found no significant difference for lung, colorectal, prostate or skin cancer (Pillai et al., The Oncologist, 2025).
• Case reports: doctors have described oral cancers in young heavy vapers, including a rapidly fatal HPV-negative oral cancer in a young adult (Klawinski et al., Pediatrics, 2021). Single cases raise questions. They cannot show cause.

Human studies on vaping and cancer compared

The table below compares the seven human studies and reports covered above. It sets out who each one studied, what it found and the main reason to read it with care.

Two rules apply to every row. An association in an observational study does not prove cause. A study that finds no link after two years does not prove safety either.

Which cancer-causing chemicals are in vape aerosol?

Vape aerosol contains several recognized human carcinogens, most of them created when the coil heats the liquid or shed by the coil itself. Heating propylene glycol and glycerin produces aldehydes. Nicotine extracted from tobacco can carry nitrosamines. Metal parts release chromium, nickel and lead into the aerosol. Our guide to PG/VG ratios explains what these base liquids are.

Carcinogens found in e-cigarette aerosol

IARC classifications describe whether a chemical can cause cancer at some level of exposure. They do not measure the dose a vaper inhales, which is why the levels below matter.

How much lower are the levels than in cigarette smoke?

For most carcinogens, vape aerosol carries a small fraction of what cigarette smoke delivers. Goniewicz and colleagues measured carbonyls, volatile organic compounds, nitrosamines and metals and found toxicant levels 9 to 450 times lower in e-cigarette vapor than in cigarette smoke (Tobacco Control, 2014). Stephens modeled lifetime cancer potency from published emissions data. Most e-cigarette aerosols scored below 1% of tobacco smoke, with an average near 0.4%. That was still about 11 times the modeled risk of a medicinal nicotine inhaler (Tobacco Control, 2018).

Metals are the exception to the "far lower" rule. The US National Academies found substantial evidence that e-cigarette aerosol contains metals and noted that cadmium is markedly lower than in cigarette smoke (NASEM, 2018). A US biomarker study found similar metal levels in exclusive vapers and in smokers (Goniewicz et al., 2018). When Zhao and colleagues pooled published measurements into a risk model, the average inhaled cancer risk ranked chromium first, followed by formaldehyde, nickel, acetaldehyde and arsenic. All five exceeded the one-in-a-million level that regulators treat as acceptable (Scientific Reports, 2023). These are modeled estimates, not counted cancers.

Do wattage and coil temperature change the risk?

Yes. Running more power through a coil than its liquid supply can handle sharply raises aldehyde output. Stephens found that excessive power pushed formaldehyde potency toward cigarette-smoke levels in a small minority of tests, a risk he described as usually avoidable once the cause is known. Zhao's team also concluded that controlling device power and e-liquid composition can reduce the hazard. Sub-ohm direct-lung setups run at far higher wattage than mouth-to-lung pods, as our guide to MTL, DL and RDL vaping styles explains.

In practice that means staying inside the wattage range printed on your coil or pod, never vaping on a dry or burnt-tasting coil and replacing coils and pod cartridges as soon as the flavor turns harsh. Our guide to e-cigarette coils explains how coils work.

Can vaping damage DNA or cause precancerous changes?

Laboratory, animal and early human studies show that vaping triggers several of the cell changes that come before cancer. None of these studies shows that vapers develop cancer. Each one shows a step on the path that cancer researchers watch for.

• DNA damage in the mouth: researchers at the University of Minnesota brushed cells from the cheeks of 20 vapers and 20 non-users. Vapers had a median level of acrolein-DNA adducts about 8.5 times higher, a type of damage that can cause mutations if it is not repaired (Cheng et al., Carcinogenesis, 2022).
• Smoker-like DNA changes: a team from University College London and the University of Innsbruck analyzed more than 3,500 samples. E-cigarette users who had smoked fewer than 100 cigarettes in their lives showed DNA methylation changes in cheek cells similar to those seen in smokers. In smokers, these changes are linked to later lung cancer (Herzog et al., Cancer Research, 2024). The lead author was clear about the limit: "We cannot say that e-cigarettes cause cancer based on our study."
• Weakened DNA repair: in mice, e-cigarette aerosol damaged DNA in the lung, heart and bladder and reduced DNA repair activity. Nicotine and its nitrosation product caused similar effects in human lung and bladder cells (Lee et al., PNAS, 2018).
• Tumors in mice: after 54 weeks of exposure to nicotine-containing aerosol, 9 of 40 mice (22.5%) developed lung adenocarcinomas and 23 of 40 (57.5%) developed bladder hyperplasia, a precancerous change. Only one control mouse developed lung cancer (Tang et al., PNAS, 2019).

Why lab and animal results need caution

The mouse study shows why caution runs in both directions. Its authors flagged the small sample and a mouse strain prone to lung tumors. They also said their results "were not meant to be compared to human disease." Cell and animal studies use doses, exposure methods and timescales that differ from human vaping. The US National Academies summed up the gap: whether exposure levels are "high enough to contribute to human carcinogenesis remains to be determined" (NASEM, 2018).

What did the 2026 Australian review conclude?

It concluded that nicotine e-cigarettes are likely to cause lung and oral cancer, based on mechanistic, animal and biomarker evidence rather than counts of cancer in vapers. The Clinical Oncology Society of Australia first published the assessment in 2025. A peer-reviewed version by Bernard Stewart, Freddy Sitas and colleagues appeared in Carcinogenesis in March 2026 and made headlines worldwide. The authors weighed more than 100 studies against the ten key characteristics of carcinogens used by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. They judged nicotine-based e-cigarettes "likely to be carcinogenic to humans who use them" but could not size the risk. As Stewart put it: "We can't say how much."

Does nicotine itself cause cancer?

Nicotine is not classified as a carcinogen, but it is not harmless. It is the addictive ingredient in both cigarettes and vapes. The US Surgeon General's 2014 report found "insufficient data to conclude that nicotine causes or contributes to cancer in humans" while noting evidence of possible oral, esophageal and pancreatic cancer risks.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has never classified nicotine. In 2024 its advisory group did name electronic nicotine delivery systems a high priority for future evaluation, citing animal and mechanistic evidence (Lancet Oncology, 2024).

Where nicotine may matter for cancer is in promotion rather than initiation. In laboratory studies it helps existing cancer cells multiply, grow new blood vessels, resist programmed cell death and spread (Grando, Nature Reviews Cancer, 2014). The Surgeon General's report described nicotine as "a tumor promoter in some experimental models." Nicotine can also be chemically converted into nitrosamines such as NNK and NNN (COSA, 2025). For the addiction side of the story, read the science behind nicotine addiction.

Vaping vs smoking: how do cancer risks compare?

Compared with smoking, vaping exposes people to far lower levels of most carcinogens. Compared with not vaping at all, it adds exposure. Both statements are true at once. Which one applies depends on what vaping replaces: cigarettes or nothing.

The US PATH study measured 50 biomarkers in 5,105 adults (Goniewicz et al., JAMA Network Open, 2018). Exclusive vapers had 10% to 98% lower levels of nitrosamines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, most volatile organic compounds and nicotine than exclusive smokers. Their metal levels were similar to those of smokers. Never users had 19% to 81% lower levels than vapers of nicotine, nitrosamines, cadmium, lead and an acrylonitrile marker. Dual users carried higher levels than smokers on several biomarkers. The more often they smoked, the higher their exposure.

Cancer risk by user group

Stephens' modeling put most e-cigarette aerosols below 1% of the cancer potency of tobacco smoke. Yet lower exposure is not the same as a proven drop in cancer cases. The US National Academies found conclusive evidence that completely switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes reduces exposure to numerous toxicants and carcinogens. Whether that becomes fewer cancers will only show in long-term data. For the wider comparison beyond cancer, see vaping vs smoking safety.

Heated tobacco products sit between the two. Dusautoir and colleagues found they emitted fewer polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and carbonyls than cigarettes but more than e-cigarettes (Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2021).

Why is the long-term cancer risk of vaping so hard to study?

Some cancers take years or decades to develop, and vaping has been widely used for only about 15 years. Five problems stand between today's data and a firm answer.

1. Latency. There is no fixed latency period for lung or oral cancer. Timing varies by disease, exposure and individual, and e-cigarettes became popular only after 2010. Long-term evidence on exclusive vaping remains limited (Little et al., 2024).
2. Past smoking. Most adult vapers smoked first. Separating the effect of years of vapor from decades of smoke is statistically difficult.
3. Changing devices. Early studies tracked low-power cig-a-likes. Their results say little about today's high-wattage pod mods, sub-ohm tanks, nicotine salts or synthetic nicotine.
4. Mixed use. People switch back and forth, dual use often goes unrecorded and e-liquids vary widely. That blurs who was exposed to what.
5. Few long-term cohorts. An Australian umbrella review found no prospective studies of sufficient quality to assess cancer risk in e-cigarette users (Banks et al., 2023). A 2025 systematic review agreed that recent studies "do not definitively indicate that vaping e-cigarettes is linked to increased cancer risk" while calling the evidence severely limited (Kundu et al., Tobacco Induced Diseases, 2025).

Missing evidence is not reassurance. As Cancer Council Victoria's Tobacco in Australia review puts it, the lack of epidemiological evidence "cannot be taken to mean that e-cigarette use cannot cause cancer."

How should you read a vaping and cancer headline?

Check five things before trusting any headline about vaping and cancer. The same dataset can produce opposite-sounding stories depending on who is compared with whom.

1. Who was studied? Never-smokers, current smokers, former smokers and dual users carry different baseline risks. A result in one group does not transfer to another.
2. Compared with what? Vaping vs quitting and vaping vs smoking give different answers from the same data, as the 2026 Korean study shows.
3. For how long? Cancer latency varies and may span many years or decades. Short studies can miss outcomes that emerge later.
4. People, animals or cells? Mouse and cell results show what is biologically possible, not how many people will get sick.
5. Relative or absolute risk? "Twice the risk" of a rare event can still mean a small number of extra cases. Look for the actual numbers.

What do health and cancer authorities say about vaping?

Every major health body agrees that vaping is not risk-free. They differ on how strongly to stress that it is less harmful than smoking.

The agreement is broader than the headlines suggest: vaping is not harmless and it is less toxic than smoking. The disagreement is about emphasis. It is also about whether cell, animal and biomarker evidence is strong enough to call e-cigarettes carcinogenic before human cancer data arrive.

What are the common myths about vaping and cancer?

Five popular beliefs about vaping and cancer do not survive contact with the evidence.

Myth 1: "Vape aerosol is just harmless water vapor."

Vape aerosol is a mist of fine particles that carries nicotine, flavorings, aldehydes, nitrosamines and metals. The US National Academies found conclusive evidence that vaping raises indoor levels of particulate matter and nicotine above background levels.

Myth 2: "Vaping is proven to cause lung cancer, just like smoking."

No study has shown that. Proving smoking's link to lung cancer took decades of data on millions of people. Vaping's human data are young and mostly involve people who also smoked.

Myth 3: "Vaping is completely harmless."

Vapers carry more acrolein-DNA damage in their mouth cells than non-users. They show smoker-like DNA methylation changes. They also have higher levels of carcinogen biomarkers than never users. Harmless products do not leave those traces.

Myth 4: "No proof of cancer means no risk."

The lack of long-term evidence does not prove safety. Cancer latency varies, and studies of exclusive vaping still need longer follow-up.

Myth 5: "Nicotine is what causes cancer in cigarettes."

Most of the carcinogens in cigarette smoke come from burning tobacco and from the tobacco leaf itself, not from nicotine. Nicotine is addictive and may help existing tumors grow, but it is not classified as a carcinogen.

What should smokers, vapers and never-smokers do?

The right move depends on where you start.

If you have never smoked

Do not start vaping. You would add carcinogen exposure, DNA damage markers and nicotine dependence with no health benefit in return. ICONA VAPE sells only to adults, under our age policy.

If you smoke

Quitting all tobacco and nicotine is the healthiest outcome. If you cannot quit yet, switching completely from cigarettes to vaping cuts your exposure to most carcinogens. Vaping while still smoking does not. Treat vaping as a route off cigarettes and then off nicotine, not as a permanent habit. Our guides on how vaping can help you quit smoking and your first 20 days without cigarettes cover the switch itself.

If you already vape

• Do not go back to cigarettes and avoid dual use.
• Stay within your coil's rated wattage and never vape on a dry or burnt coil.
• If you vape after quitting smoking, plan to bring your nicotine down to zero. The 2026 Korean data suggest that vaping after quitting may blunt the lung cancer benefit of quitting.
• Tell your doctor that you vape and how much you smoked before.

When to see a doctor

Do not wait on a mouth ulcer, lump or discolored patch that has not healed within three weeks. The same applies to a cough that lasts three weeks or longer. Coughing up blood needs prompt attention. These are warning signs whether or not you smoke or vape.

Vaping and cancer FAQs

Can vaping cause lung cancer?

A causal link in people who have never smoked has not been established, and long-term evidence on exclusive vaping remains limited. The warning signs are real. Vape aerosol carries formaldehyde, nitrosamines and metals into the lungs. A 2026 study of 4.5 million Korean adults found that former smokers who vaped had a 56% higher lung cancer risk than former smokers who quit without vaping.

Did a 2026 study prove that vaping causes cancer?

No. The widely reported March 2026 review in Carcinogenesis, by a team including Bernard Stewart and Freddy Sitas of UNSW Sydney, concluded that e-cigarettes are likely to cause lung and oral cancer. It weighed more than 100 cell, animal and human biomarker studies rather than counts of cancer in vapers. Its authors say the size of the risk cannot yet be measured.

Does vaping cause mouth or throat cancer?

It is not proven, but the mouth gets the most direct contact with aerosol. Vapers' cheek cells carry a median of about 8.5 times more acrolein-DNA damage than the cells of non-users and show smoker-like DNA methylation changes. Case reports describe oral cancers in young heavy vapers. The 2026 Australian review rates oral cancer as a likely risk. Human incidence data do not exist yet.

Does nicotine-free vaping eliminate cancer risk?

No. Removing nicotine removes nicotine-derived nitrosamines, but heating propylene glycol and glycerin still produces formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein. Metals from the coil are released whether or not the liquid contains nicotine.

Do disposable vapes cause cancer?

The same questions apply. Disposables heat nicotine liquid on a metal coil, which produces the same classes of aldehydes and metals as refillable devices. No study has tracked cancer in disposable users specifically. Exposure rises with the number of puffs taken each day.

Is secondhand vape aerosol dangerous for people nearby?

It exposes bystanders to less nicotine and fewer particles than secondhand smoke, but it is not clean air. The US National Academies found conclusive evidence that vaping raises indoor particulate matter and nicotine above background levels. They also found moderate evidence that secondhand exposure is lower than from cigarettes. Avoid vaping indoors or around children and anyone pregnant.

Is vaping less likely to cause cancer than smoking?

Based on exposure, yes. Exclusive vapers in the US PATH study had 10% to 98% lower levels of nitrosamines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and most volatile organic compounds than smokers. Modeled cancer potency for most e-cigarettes is below 1% of tobacco smoke. Lower exposure has not yet been confirmed as fewer cancers. Quitting nicotine altogether remains the most protective choice.

Is it risky to keep vaping after quitting smoking?

The best evidence so far points that way for lung cancer. In the 2026 Korean study, former smokers who used e-cigarettes after quitting had a 56% higher risk of lung cancer and twice the risk of lung cancer death compared with former smokers who did not vape. The authors could not prove cause. The finding still supports treating vaping as a temporary step off cigarettes.

Does vaping damage DNA?

Yes, the evidence points that way. Vapers' mouth cells carry more acrolein-DNA adducts than the cells of non-users. Vapers also show smoker-like DNA methylation changes. In mice and in human cells, e-cigarette aerosol damages DNA and reduces DNA repair activity.

How long until scientists know the true cancer risk of vaping?

There is no precise deadline. Researchers need large groups of exclusive vapers who never smoked, followed long enough to observe cancer outcomes. Twenty to thirty years is an illustrative research horizon, not a universal cancer latency period or a guarantee of definitive answers by a particular year.

The verdict: does vaping cause cancer?

Vaping is far less toxic than smoking. It is not proven safe. It is not proven to cause cancer either.

• What is proven: vape aerosol is not water vapor. It contains measurable carcinogens, aldehydes and metals. Vapers carry higher toxicant biomarkers than never users and show DNA damage in their mouth cells.
• What is plausible: daily inhalation of these chemicals over decades could contribute to lung and oral cancer. Cell, animal and biomarker studies all point the same way.
• What is still unknown: how many cancers vaping causes in people who never smoked and how large the risk is for long-term vapers.

Reject both easy answers. Vaping is not harmless and it is not the same as smoking. If you do not smoke, do not start. If you smoke, a complete switch is far better than carrying on. Stopping nicotine altogether is better still. For effects beyond cancer, see our overview of health concerns with vaping.

Sources

1. Kim YW, Park EJ, Kwak KI, et al. Electronic cigarette use after smoking cessation and lung cancer risk. Nature Medicine. 2026;32(7):2410-2419.
2. Kim T, Kim H, Shin SH, et al. E-cigarette switching in COPD: reduced cardiovascular events without improvement in respiratory outcomes. Respiratory Research. 2026;27:141.
3. Song BG, Lee M, Cho J, et al. E-cigarette switching, smoking cessation, and the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic hepatitis B: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea. Preventive Medicine. 2026;205:108530.
4. Bittoni MA, Carbone DP, Harris RE. Vaping, smoking and risk of early onset lung cancer. Frontiers in Oncology. 2026;15:1741978.
5. Manzoli L, Flacco ME, Ferrante M, et al. Cohort study of electronic cigarette use: effectiveness and safety at 24 months. Tobacco Control. 2017;26(3):284-292.
6. Pillai DG, Chau CH, Price DK, Figg WD. Vaping and cancer metastasis: novel preclinical insights and results from the All of Us Research Program. The Oncologist. 2025;30(7):oyaf190.
7. Klawinski D, Hanna I, Breslin NK, et al. Vaping the venom: oral cavity cancer in a young adult with extensive electronic cigarette use. Pediatrics. 2021;147(5).
8. Goniewicz ML, Knysak J, Gawron M, et al. Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tobacco Control. 2014;23(2):133-139.
9. Goniewicz ML, Smith DM, Edwards KC, et al. Comparison of nicotine and toxicant exposure in users of electronic cigarettes and combustible cigarettes. JAMA Network Open. 2018;1(8):e185937.
10. Stephens WE. Comparing the cancer potencies of emissions from vapourised nicotine products including e-cigarettes with those of tobacco smoke. Tobacco Control. 2018;27(1):10-17.
11. Zhao S, Zhang X, Wang J, et al. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk assessment of organic compounds and heavy metals in electronic cigarettes. Scientific Reports. 2023;13:16046.
12. Dusautoir R, Zarcone G, Verriele M, et al. Comparison of the chemical composition of aerosols from heated tobacco products, electronic cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes and their toxic impacts on the human bronchial epithelial BEAS-2B cells. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2021;401:123417.
13. Cheng G, Guo J, Carmella SG, et al. Increased acrolein-DNA adducts in buccal brushings of e-cigarette users. Carcinogenesis. 2022;43(5):437-444.
14. Herzog C, Jones A, Evans I, et al. Cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use induce shared DNA methylation changes linked to carcinogenesis. Cancer Research. 2024;84(11):1898-1914. Author quote via UCL News, March 2024.
15. Lee HW, Park SH, Weng MW, et al. E-cigarette smoke damages DNA and reduces repair activity in mouse lung, heart, and bladder as well as in human lung and bladder cells. PNAS. 2018;115(7):E1560-E1569.
16. Tang MS, Wu XR, Lee HW, et al. Electronic-cigarette smoke induces lung adenocarcinoma and bladder urothelial hyperplasia in mice. PNAS. 2019;116(43):21727-21731. Author quote via NIH Research Matters, October 2019.
17. Stewart BW, Marshall H, Bonevski B, et al. The carcinogenicity of e-cigarettes: a qualitative risk assessment. Carcinogenesis. 2026.
18. Stewart B. E-cigarettes and Cancer: A Qualitative Risk Assessment. Clinical Oncology Society of Australia. 2025. Author quote via COSA media release, August 2025.
19. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Public Health Consequences of E-Cigarettes. The National Academies Press. 2018.
20. US Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking: 50 Years of Progress, Chapter 5: Nicotine. A Report of the Surgeon General. 2014.
21. Berrington de González A, Masten SA, Bhatti P, et al. Advisory Group recommendations on priorities for the IARC Monographs. Lancet Oncology. 2024;25(5):546-548.
22. Grando SA. Connections of nicotine to cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2014;14(6):419-429.
23. World Health Organization. Tobacco: E-cigarettes, questions and answers. January 19, 2024.
24. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. E-cigarettes. Reviewed January 31, 2025.
25. NHS. Using e-cigarettes to stop smoking. Reviewed July 15, 2026.
26. Lindson N, et al. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, living systematic review.
27. Banks E, Yazidjoglou A, Brown S, et al. Electronic cigarettes and health outcomes: umbrella and systematic review of the global evidence. Medical Journal of Australia. 2023;218(6):267-275.
28. Kundu A, et al. Evidence update on the cancer risk of vaping e-cigarettes: a systematic review. Tobacco Induced Diseases. 2025.
29. Winnall WR, Greenhalgh EM, Scollo MM. 18.6.4 E-cigarette use and the risk of cancer. In: Tobacco in Australia: Facts and Issues. Cancer Council Victoria. Updated August 2026.
30. Little MP, Eidemüller M, Kaiser JC, Apostoaei AI. Minimum latency effects for cancer associated with exposures to radiation or other carcinogens. British Journal of Cancer. 2024;130:819-829.
31. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics and World Health Organization. Global Adult Tobacco Survey: Pakistan 2014 fact sheet.

About this guide

How we researched it. This guide was written by ICONA VAPE. It is based on the extensive research consisting peer-reviewed studies and health agency publications listed above, published up to October 2026. Each figure was checked against its original source.

Our interest. ICONA VAPE is an online vape store in Karachi that sells to adults across Pakistan. We have a commercial interest in vaping. That is why this guide reports the findings that count against vaping as plainly as the findings in its favor.

Not medical advice. This article is general information. Speak to a doctor about your own health, especially if you have smoked heavily or have symptoms.

Last updated: October 14, 2026.