Prisons Explore Vaping to Address Smoking-Related Harms

Prison authorities in Ireland are examining whether controlled vaping could reduce exposure to cigarette smoke, even as the country debates tougher vaping restrictions. Experience in England and Wales shows how a specially designed vape helped address a fire risk without removing the smoke-free nicotine alternative.

The contrast reflects a wider debate about tobacco harm reduction. While vaping is facing tighter scrutiny outside prison walls, correctional authorities in Ireland, England and Wales are exploring whether controlled products can help reduce smoking-related harms and address nicotine dependence.

How England and Wales addressed a prison fire risk

Prisons in England and Wales became smoke-free in 2018, with vaping, nicotine replacement therapy and cessation support offered as alternatives. Vaping was popular, but conventional devices could be dismantled, allowing prisoners to use their heated coils to start fires.

Rather than ban vaping, HM Prison and Probation Service worked with manufacturer Moja to develop a tamper-resistant Safer Vape Pen. The device is designed to break apart if someone tries to dismantle it to reach the heating element.

Parliamentary evidence indicates that vape-related fires fell sharply after its introduction. One submission reported a 92% reduction in vape-related fires, while officials told the House of Lords that the wider initiative contributed to a 46% reduction in overall prison fires.

Prison officials previously cited more than 2,000 vape-related fires. During the first five months of 2026, 36 were reported. Prisons Minister Lord Timpson told peers he did not believe vaping should be banned in prisons.

Other fire-prevention measures were introduced at the same time, so the figures do not show that the device redesign alone caused the full decline. The approach nevertheless illustrates how authorities responded to an unintended risk by changing the product rather than removing the alternative.

Ireland considers vaping amid concerns about cigarette smoke

At Wheatfield Prison in Dublin, concerns about prison officers’ exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke have led to air-quality investigations and measures including improved ventilation and smoking-cessation support. Officials have also reportedly explored prison-specific vaping products and tighter controls on tobacco availability.

Cigarettes burn tobacco and produce second-hand smoke containing combustion-related toxicants. Vaping does not involve combustion. The source article argues that moving prisoners who smoke completely to vaping would remove cigarette smoke from that source, while noting that indoor vaping raises no serious concerns about aerosol exposure and air quality.

The issue has particular relevance in workplaces where staff cannot simply avoid the environment. The article says Ireland could consider a tightly controlled alternative designed for prison settings, while recognising that vaping is not harmless and that cigarette smoking and nicotine vaping do not present equivalent risks.

Ireland’s wider debate over vaping

The prison discussion follows comments by Taoiseach Micheál Martin supporting the possibility of a vaping ban and describing vapes as “nearly worse than cigarettes.” He also called vaping the “revenge of Big Tobacco.” Tobacco harm reduction advocates have challenged those comments, saying they do not reflect the comparative-risk evidence.

The article cites a Cochrane living systematic review published in August. It reported high-certainty evidence that nicotine e-cigarettes help more people quit smoking than conventional nicotine replacement therapy, including patches and gum. For every 100 people trying to quit, the review estimated that about eight to ten would succeed with nicotine vaping, compared with around six using nicotine replacement therapy.

Cochrane’s findings concern regulated nicotine e-cigarettes. The review found no evidence of serious short-term harm, while noting that larger, longer studies are needed to assess long-term safety. The article also notes broad agreement that vaping should not be encouraged among children or people who do not smoke.

England and Wales offer an example of a practical response to a specific prison challenge: after conventional devices created a fire risk, authorities worked on a tamper-resistant alternative. Ireland’s consideration of vaping to address cigarette-smoke exposure raises a related question about whether a controlled alternative can be adapted to a particular setting, even as political debate over vaping grows more restrictive.